Sikhism

[AvarAllahNoor]

Muhammad (pbuh) did cause much of the world to recite the Quran though!

How was it spread throughout history though! :brother:

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

I don't understand how you can acknowledge him as a prophet if he contradicts sikh doctrine. How can you respect him if he teaches different things about God, which in sikh eyes is untrue about God?

OK, this 'may' help you in understanding. You believe Jesus was a prophet, but don't accept him as God in human form, why?? You say the Bible has been changed how convenient!

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

How do you know the verse 'Mohammed is the only last prophet' wasn't added in by his followeres just as you claim the Bible has been altered?

 

[bint_muhammed]

How do you know the verse 'Mohammed is the only last prophet' wasn't added in by his followeres just as you claim the Bible has been altered?

because many many non-muslims who have research the validity of teh quran and if it has been altered have come to the conclusion that it hasnt! however the bible has been changed as you can get thousands of different copies with different teachings, you dont find that with the quran! :brother:

 

[Mohsin]

If that is the case and what you believe about Gods actions, then ask yourself-why is the whole world not Muslim.

Muhammed didn't cause the world to recite naam (divine profit). For further info read the many informative posts that ppl have typed.

bhul chuk maaf

Muhammed PBUH never asked anyone to worship him.

Number two, what does it matter if the whole world is muslim or not. God created us for a test. he will test us to see if we follow the true path. It is the whole reason of our existence. If we pass the test we will enter heaven, if not we will enter hell

So the question still stands, why would God choose a prophet who is going to follow his own desires. surely God will only choose righteous people, the best of the best to send a message to, as these people will need to be role models for the people. Do you think god did not know the future, or somehow was unaware Muhammed PBUH was going to disobey him and start making his own religion up as you think. Obviously you don't believe in heaven/hell, or adam/Eve, but Muhammed PBUH talked about this, why did God allow his messenger to lie to the people and misguide them into useless rituals.

Fact, Islam today is widely accepted by most people as the fastest growing religion in the world. It, contains a sixth of the world population. Surely God knew the future, right? He would know one day Islam would be the biggest religion in the world, so he knew over a billion people will follow this misguided religion created by Muhammed who was following his own desires. I ask you why did he allow this? Why did he allow Muhammed PBUH to make up his own religion. he can easily stop him, have him destroyed etc. i mean come on he would be making up lies claiming God is saying them, surely this is blasphemous and absolitely evil in God's eyes, so why was he allowed to continue his message, not for one year, or two, but for 23 years!!!


Ok read the following verses of the Qur'an, taken from a talk by Dr Zakir Naik refuting people who claim muhammed created islam for moral reformation

Moral Reformation :



The Qur’an says: Who can be more wicked than one who invents a lie against Allah or says “I have received inspiration” when he has received none or (again) who says “I can reveal the like of what Allah has revealed?” (Al-Qur’an 6:93) This verse prescribes the most humiliating punishment for such liars. If Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was the author of the Qur’an, was he deceitfully ascribing it to God and describing himself as the most wicked man? Had he been the author of the Qur’an, there was every possibility that his fabrication might one day be uncovered and get him into trouble.



a) A similar warning is given in the Qur’an in the following verse: “And if the messenger were to invent any sayings in Our name We should certainly seize him by his right hand And We should certainly then cut off the artery of his heart: Nor could any of you withhold him (from Our wrath).” (Al-Qur’an 69:44-47) There are several such verses in the Qur’an e.g. Al-Qur’an 42:24 & 16:105.



b) Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) did not deliver the whole Qur’an at one sitting. He recited it piecemeal over a period of about 23 years during which any question would be answered. The Qur’an says: “If you ask about things when the Qur’an is being revealed they will be made plain to you” (Al-Qur’an 5:101) People took this opportunity to ask a wide range of questions covering subjects like intoxicants, gambling, charity, new moon, menstruation, spoils of war, or even historical figures like Zulqarnain. Therefore the Qur’an mentions in several places “They ask thee concerning such and such matter. Say: it is so and so”. In no way could Muhammad (pbuh) have known in advance the questions he would be asked, thus perfectly matching his reformation purposes for which he had set out to write the Qur’an. It would be foolish for a Prime Minister who wants to talk about the transportation facility in his country to call a press conference and invite the press to ask any question. They may choose to inquire about the food situation or even about political prisoners.



c) There is sufficient proof in the Qur’an against this moral reformation theory because Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) himself is corrected by the Qur’an in several places. Once while Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) was deeply engrossed, trying to convince the teachings of Islam to pagan Quraish leaders of Makkah, a poor Muslim blind man, Abdullah Ibn Umm-Makhtum interrupted the discussion because he wanted to learn the Qur’an. The Prophet (pbuh) did not appreciate this interruption, which was evident by his frowning. Although the prophet (pbuh) did not say a word yet a revelation was consequently sent which is preserved forever in the Qur’an. “The (Prophet) frowned and turned away because there came to him the blind man (interrupting). But what could tell you but that perchance he might grow (in spiritual understanding)? Or that he might receive admonition and the teaching might profit him?” (Al-Qur’an 80:1-4) Anyone besides the Prophet (pbuh), whether saint or sinner, would not have been questioned so. But he, whose gentle heart ever sympathized with the poor and affected, got new light from above, and without the least hesitation published this revelation in the Qur’an. Subsequently every time he met this blind man, he received him graciously and thanked him that on his account, God had remembered him. There are several similar verses in the Qur’an e.g. in response to Prophet’s (pbuh) oath of not taking honey, Al-Qur’an 66:1 was revealed. In context of revenge of Hamzah (ra) death, Al-Qur’an 16:126 was revealed. In context of prisoners of war for ransom, Al-Qur’an 8:67 was revealed. When Prophet (pbuh) had prayed for a hypocrite, Al-Qur’an 9:84 was revealed.

 

[Mohsin]

How was it spread throughout history though! :brother:

Through peaceful means. Majority of people converted because they knew it was the truth. Look at the conversion during the prophet PBUH's time, everybody converted out of free choice, even when people (old and young) would know if they converted they would face persecution and starvation. look at indonesia, look at the western world today, where is the sword today forcing people to convert. People are converting out of their own free choice.

I know you might reply in parrotted fashion like my sikh friends and say what about india, but what does it matter if in one place it was allegedly spread by the sword (It is wrong of course if that did happen) but you can't say just because of the Moghul empire, the whole of the muslim empire was spread by force, not only is it illogical, it is sad and pathetic to hold on to such weak ideas. It seems to me people adopt these ideas just to re-assure themselves islam is bad etc without looking with an open mind

 

[Mohsin]

OK, this 'may' help you in understanding. You believe Jesus was a prophet, but don't accept him as God in human form, why?? You say the Bible has been changed how convenient!

Lol good try, but there are big differences here bro.

1. Early christians did not believe in jesus as god in human form, this offcial doctrine came later. If you look at the early countries that converted to islam, you will find they are all now Muslim countries, as they were expecting another prophet PBUh and had no problem with the islamic doctrine of One supreme God, with jesus PBUH as a man and messenger

2. Also not only do Muslims claim the Bible has been changed, but so do millions of non-muslims, and even honest Christians themselves acknowledge it has been changed due to translational errors, which brings me to my 3rd point

3. Jesus PBUH spoke Armaic, it was written down in hebrew, then translated to Greek, and now into English. So many errors have occured. however in the Qur'an it is still in its present form, in Arabic as it was before unchanged and untouched

4. We believe the Bible was once the word of God, but no longer is. Our argument is supported by numerous contradictions in the bible, which God can cnot committ, and so these must have been added by humans. With the Qur'an there is not even a single contradiction

5. The Qur'an is unchanged. this is a fact, acknowledged by many non-muslims, even the greatest enemies and critics of islam have admitted to not even a letter ever being changed

 

[Mohsin]

How do you know the verse 'Mohammed is the only last prophet' wasn't added in by his followeres just as you claim the Bible has been altered?

Most of the proofs for the above statement which I posted come from the authentic hadith, narrations from reliable companions who were known to never lie, not even in jokes with friends. They were so careful in transmitting the message of the prophet PBUH. And plus it is extremely unlikely so many different companions would forge an exact same lie in different parts of the world. ILLOGICAL!!!

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

Through peaceful means. Majority of people converted because they knew it was the truth. Look at the conversion during the prophet PBUH's time, everybody converted out of free choice, even when people (old and young) would know if they converted they would face persecution and starvation. look at indonesia, look at the western world today, where is the sword today forcing people to convert. People are converting out of their own free choice.

I. The Islamic Crusades

Few Westerners know that the Muslims launched their own Crusades outside of Arabia two years after Muhammad’s death of a fever in AD 632. The first part of this article answers three questions about the early Muslim Crusades. In this article, the word Crusade (derived from the Latin word for "cross") means a holy war or jihad. It is used as a counterweight to the constant Muslim accusation that only the Europeans launched a crusade. Muslims seem to forget that they had their own, for several centuries before the Europeans launched theirs as a defense against the Islamic expansion (cf. The Real History of the Crusades).

1. Who or what inspired the Islamic Crusades?

It may surprise the reader that Muhammad was the first to launch a Crusade.

In October to December 630, after the conquest of Mecca in January 630, Muhammad launches a Crusade to Tabuk, a city in the north of Saudi Arabia today, but in the seventh century it was under the control of northern tribes. "Crusade" is the right word, because early Muslim sources say the army had 30,000 men and 10,000 horsemen and because Muhammad did so under the banner of Islam. On his way north, Muhammad extracts (or extorts) "agreements"—without provocation—from smaller Christian Arab tribes to pay the jizyah tax, instead of being attacked and killed (a jizya tax is exacted from non-Muslims for the "privilege" of living under Islam; see Sura 9:29). They also had the option to convert, but most do not and agree, rather, to pay the tax. Once the Muslims reach Tabuk, however, the Byzantine army fails to materialize. Muhammad the prophet had believed a false rumor. So Muhammad and his large army return home.

So it is Muhammad himself who inspired the first generations of Muslims to carry out his Crusades.

In the Muslim community, the holy war is a religious duty, because of the universalism of the Muslim mission and (the obligation to) convert everybody to Islam either by persuasion or by force. (The Muqaddimah: an Introduction to History (abridged), trans. Franz Rosenthal, Princeton UP, 1967, p. 183)

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

The first (Muslim) victory over them and the European Christians (in the Maghrib) was of no avail. They continued to rebel and apostatized time after time. The Muslims massacred many of them. After the Muslim religion had been established among them, they went on revolting and seceding, and they adopted dissident religious opinions many times. They remained disobedient and unmanageable .... Therefore, it has taken the Arabs a long time to establish their dynasty in the ... Maghrib. (p. 131

Using wisdom that is based on observation, the Medieval Muslim scholar acknowledges that slaughter occurred not only to establish a worldly dynasty, but also to force people to convert to the true religion by the sword, even though some of the inhabitants in the Maghrib were People of the Book, European Christians. If they did not convert, then "the Muslims massacred many of them," he says, matter-of-factly. This excerpt also shows that many did not want to become Muslims, or when they gave up and became Muslims, they "apostatized [and] ... adopted dissident religious opinions ... and remained disobedient." Therefore, freedom of religion was not the purpose of Islam, as it was not in Muhammad’s days, when he conquered Mecca and the Arabian Peninsula.

Though European Crusaders may have been sincere, they wandered off from the origins of Christianity when they slashed and burned and forced conversionsIt is a plain and unpleasant historical fact that in the ten years that Muhammad lived in Medina (622-632), he either sent out or went out on seventy-four raids, expeditions, or full-scale wars, which range from small assassination hit squads to the Tabuk Crusade, described above. Sometimes the expeditions did not result in violence, but a Muslim army always lurked in the background. Muhammad could exact a terrible vengeance on an individual or tribe that double-crossed him. These ten years did not know long stretches of peace

 

[Curaezipirid]

First I would like to apologise for making some sort of random posts in this thread without keeping up with the entire of the discussion. In that I would like to clarify the last post I made.

It is that I am familiar with systems of belief in which it is regarded that if a person has in body died, that when we remember their life, we are in fact calling upon the Spirit of the deceased to also remember that time. It is, simply because of such a belief that some Religious belief works against the constantly being reminded of any specific individual. This fits within the same teaching as not worshiping idols. Yet both warn also against worship of false prophets. I was postulating that it is possible that a figure such as Guru Ji may have been not using the personality of Mohammed in his teaching only out of deferrence. In some systems of belief it is regarded that our tendency to depend upon a single teacher's past life story can actualise delaying that such person enter Jannah. I do not know if this is the case with Guru Ji, he could as easily be establishing himself falsely by not placing his own teaching under that of Mohammed. I am neither especially well informed in Muslim, or in Sikh scholarship, and am a Muslim reverted from within the belief of an Australian Aborigine, in our indigenous form of Islam, and as it is in modern times converging with Christianity.

My interest is really in the positive impact that Islam has had upon all other Religions in which Islam has been in contact. I believe that it is the case that a positive impact has been made by Islam in interaction with all other of the world's Religions. I believe also that our ancestors genetics were improved upon by exposure to Qur'an. In this modern time we need focus our mind upon that positive influence of Islam. We need not so much be arguing with other Religions about the areas of disagreement with Islam, as pointing to the positive impact of Islam.

I have recently been at a talk in which the teaching of Vedas was being succinctly described. It was that all that falls within Vedic teaching was being quite neatly categorised. The aspect of this that most verifies that the Religious teaching of all persons whom are within an understanding of the Veda has been positively effected by Islam is that teaching that there are three Vedas. This means only three broad streams of Religious belief. They can very generally be equated also with Judaic, Christian, and Islamic outlooks upon all that exists.

The three Vedas are first one dualistic model of comprehension of God, and then two non-dualistic models. The dualistic model establishes that there is God and a mechanised Universe, in which we are individuals are nothing more than mechanised servants of Allah. All Judaic teaching depends entirely upon being able to maintian this comprehension. The first of the two non-dualist models establishes that there is God, there is a mechanised Universe, and there is the sacred component of our self, through which as individuals we may interact with God. This model allows for some persons that they are sustaining Faith in One God whilst also believing that they themself are not always good enough to be within fluid communication with Allah. It also can be regarded as containing the dualist belief within it, much as Christianity contains Judaism. The third Veda is non-dualist also and contains both the first two Vedas. In the third Veda the comprehension of God is inimical with Islamic understanding of Allah. It is that God is the Universe and the Universe is God, and within that both the other models are equitably real.

Any Relgious teaching in which a teacher, like a Guru, is very much depended upon, falls within the second model of comprehension. A person relates to Allah, perhaps through a contempory Mujahideen Imam, and so in that relationship are enabled to acknowledge any wrongful independence from the mechanisation that Allah gave us in Qur'an, but the person is also thereby enabled to accept letting the Mujahideen Imam cause that they are mechanised and can comprehend all their being in service to Allah.

I am wondering about whether Sikhism is only within one of these models, or it Sikhism, like many Religions in a modern context, catering to persons within all three different models of comprehension of Allah.

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

It is, simply because of such a belief that some Religious belief works against the constantly being reminded of any specific individual. This fits within the same teaching as not worshiping idols. Yet both warn also against worship of false prophets. I was postulating that it is possible that a figure such as Guru Ji may have been not using the personality of Mohammed in his teaching only out of deferrence. In some systems of belief it is regarded that our tendency to depend upon a single teacher's past life story can actualise delaying that such person enter Jannah. I do not know if this is the case with Guru Ji, he could as easily be establishing himself falsely by not placing his own teaching under that of Mohammed

Hi, it's nice of you to join us, and your contribution is much appreciated sister

The whole point of Guru Ji's mission was not to associate with former Prophets, be it Mohammed, Jesus, Ram or Krishan. God instructed Guru Nanak Ji to spread the word he'd sent before. Guru Nanak was in holy communion with God. The Lord God revealed himself to Guru Nanak and enlightened him. In praise of the Lord.

Whenever there is a big catastrophe in the land, whenever there is decline of righteousness, whenever there are oppression and chaos in the land, whenever the faith of the people in God wanes, Prophets, great men or saints appear, from time to time, to enrich sacred literature, to protect Dharma, to destroy unrighteousness and reawaken the love of God in the minds of the people. There was religious persecution. The real spirit of religion was crushed by ritualism. The hearts of the people were filled with falsehood, cunningness, selfishness and greed. (Just as it is today) At such a time Guru Nanak came to the world with a message of peace, unity, love and devotion to God from God. He came at a time when there was fight between the Hindus and the Mohammedans—when real religion was replaced by mere rituals and forms. He came to preach the gospel of peace, brotherhood or the unity of humanity, love and sacrifice.

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

These are the main journeys Guru Ji made, now if you choose to believe he wasn't sent by God, that's your perogative but this show's that he was accepted to be a prophet by people of other religions. Is it so difficult to fathom! This man made journeys all over Asia, and not once did anyone have a negative word to say about him. He was sent by the almighty and this is all the proof you should require!

Guru Ji undertook five missionary journeys (udasiya) to far away places like Ceylon (Sri Lanka), Mecca, Baghdad, Kamroop (Assam), and Tashkand etc. Guru ji travelled far and wide to spread the word of Gurbani and covered most of India, present day Bangladesh, Pakistan, Tibet, Nepal, Bhutan, South West China, Afganistans, Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, West Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Syria, Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, and Kyrgyzstan.

The Divine Journeys of Guru Nanak Dev Ji

http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php?title=Guru_Nanak_Udasis

Guru Nanak in Baghdad http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php?title=Guru_Nanak_in_Baghdad

Guru Nanak in Tibet http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php?title=Guru_Nanak_in_Tibet

Guru Nanak in Nepal http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php?title=Guru_Nanak_in_Nepal

Hope this helps in understanding, i'm not here to preach, but just offer information to who the Guru Ji was!

 

[Curaezipirid]

well now, I am finding my self only able to believe in the worth of Guru Nanak (Dev Ji). Could it be that he received in Prayer that it was permitted for him to present himself as an adequate alternative to Mohammed to profess Faith within the teaching of, and because he himself is a believer in Qur'an. But that he lived at a time in which there were disputes between the Religious tradtions existant in India shows that in Allah he could have been accepting upon his own self the comprehension that it was more important at that time for Peace to exist, than that a perfect form of Islam be adhered to. So therefore we can all accept, that if indeed, as the case seems to quite obviously evidence, Guru Nanak is of Mujahideen, then we can also assume that he under took a huge burden of responsibility in having accepted to his own account that of not fully adhereing to Islam, but in the cause of Peace. Perhaps it was that at that time in India there could not have been a definitive victory of Islam over other Hindi religious worship. But surely what is important in this whole context is that all worship in India is clearly effected positively by the fact that Islam has been the dominant Religion in India. My belief is that hearing recitation of Qur'an and reading, can make a positive impact upon the future genetics. And so long as a persons sustains belief in One God, that such a positive impact is a part of the miracle of Qur'an. If one man choses not to accord his behaviour to every available teaching of Mohammed, but sustains Faith in One God, and Faith in Qur'an, then what business it is of another man to fault him. But perhaps in that very interest of Peace, we can never know whether Guru Nanak is in fact a true follower of Mohammed. And we can know that the more closely we follow the exact teaching of Mohammed, the less sever our penalty will be through the visit in the fires of Hell before attaining Jannah.

Thankyou for those website links. (from a quick look at it is clear that Guru Nanak was able to inspire persons with the same feeling of Allah's Grace as had Mohammed been)

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

well now, I am finding my self only able to believe in the worth of Guru Nanak (Dev Ji). Could it be that he received in Prayer that it was permitted for him to present himself as an adequate alternative to Mohammed to profess Faith within the teaching of, and because he himself is a believer in Qur'an. But that he lived at a time in which there were disputes between the Religious tradtions existant in India shows that in Allah he could have been accepting upon his own self the comprehension that it was more important at that time for Peace to exist, than that a perfect form of Islam be adhered to. So therefore we can all accept, that if indeed, as the case seems to quite obviously evidence, Guru Nanak is of Mujahideen, then we can also assume that he under took a huge burden of responsibility in having accepted to his own account that of not fully adhereing to Islam, but in the cause of Peace. Perhaps it was that at that time in India there could not have been a definitive victory of Islam over other Hindi religious worship. But surely what is important in this whole context is that all worship in India is clearly effected positively by the fact that Islam has been the dominant Religion in India. My belief is that hearing recitation of Qur'an and reading, can make a positive impact upon the future genetics. And so long as a persons sustains belief in One God, that such a positive impact is a part of the miracle of Qur'an. If one man choses not to accord his behaviour to every available teaching of Mohammed, but sustains Faith in One God, and Faith in Qur'an, then what business it is of another man to fault him. But perhaps in that very interest of Peace, we can never know whether Guru Nanak is in fact a true follower of Mohammed. And we can know that the more closely we follow the exact teaching of Mohammed, the less sever our penalty will be through the visit in the fires of Hell before attaining Jannah.

Thankyou for those website links. (from a quick look at it is clear that Guru Nanak was able to inspire persons with the same feeling of Allah's Grace as had Mohammed been)

But that would be a claim to Guru Ji being influenced by the conflicts that were accuring in india at the time of his arrival! It is not the case. Nowhere does Guru Ji mention Mohammed, or to be a follower of his. As his mission was not to draw attention to previous prophets (as said before) but to divert the attention of all mankind to God, and God alone!! So saying that because of the conflict, he chose not to concentrate on the Kuran is not acceptable! His mission was set-out by God!

In every heart, God dwells,
Dedicate thy will to His service.


To remember God, is to live,
To forget Him is to die.


Desire for pleasure, is the disease,
Suffering is its cure.


Peace enters the mind,
When desire for pleasure exists no more.


The fire of desire, is quenched,
by the waters of virtue.


Truth is the highest virtue
Higher still is the truthful living.


If your heart is pure, and devotion intense,
God Himself will grace your home.


They who eat the fruit of their labour
And bestow something, recognise the right path.


There can be no love of God, without active service.


Let us serve in the world,
Then shall we find a place in the court of Lord.

 

[Curaezipirid]

That is a good point that you make, that for any religious teacher to be true, their cause must be in a true calling received in prayer and not in circumstances.

Can you relate what the connection is between the Guru Gobind Singh Ji that you quote from above, and the Guru Singh whom passed away fairly recently and was the leader of the "Know Yourself as Soul" foundation. They have a meditation group near to where I live that I have attended twice, after finding some work in that tradition in a second hand bookshop. It was most illuminating upon the matter of defining Karma.

 

[AvarAllahNoor]

That is a good point that you make, that for any religious teacher to be true, their cause must be in a true calling received in prayer and not in circumstances.

Can you relate what the connection is between the Guru Gobind Singh Ji that you quote from above, and the Guru Singh whom passed away fairly recently and was the leader of the "Know Yourself as Soul" foundation. They have a meditation group near to where I live that I have attended twice, after finding some work in that tradition in a second hand bookshop. It was most illuminating upon the matter of defining Karma.

I'm not sure of what foundation you mean. Could it be the H2O foundation? that was based in Espanola? If so he was not a Guru, but a preacher, and cannot be compared as such. - He was called Harbhajan Singh Khalsa, he influenced thousands of non-Sikhs to convert to Sikhism by merely preaching the Shabad (Word from Guru Granth Ji) and he was a master of yoga!

http://www.3ho.org/lifestyle.html
http://www.sikhnet.com/YogiBhajan
http://news.miripiriacademy.org/

Is this what you mean?

 

[Curaezipirid]

There was a connection in the literature I had to a large water project. It has a story about a boy whom made a decision to carry water for his family all by himself back from the well. Then he went on the cause that a large region in India received clean drinking water in his adult life. He is Sikh, but I can not remember where he was based, only that it was in a part of India.

 

[unbreakable]

mohsin is trying to say, why dont you believe in the prophet, because god didnt send down different prophets for different people, they were all trying to bring the same message! we believ that the message of other prophets before prophet muhammed (pbuh) were changed and prophet muhammed did state he was the last prophet so do you think he was lying or is the quran not completely the word of god as that also states that he is the last prophet!

Did you not read my post?

What is it with people on this forum? Bloody hell.

No Mohammed is not the last prophet. I believe he was lying.

He is not the prophet for the Sikhs, so why should we believe in him?

Giving somebody respect is different to believing in their views.

I respect you for your faith in Islam, but that does not mean I believe in your views.

lol

 

[unbreakable]

yeah...if guru nanek says that muhammad was indeed a prophet of god, why don't you accept what he says? and he said that he was the last prophet, and no new faith/religion would come after him.

that is the question every muslim has been asking to the sikhs on this forum, but it is failed to be answered, instead, the response you get is some verses from the sggs.

lol. Zohair, just sit back down. lol