Dinosaur and Dharma

Watching the Dinosaurs yesterday on the BBC reminded me that they roamed this earth for 165 Million Years but all that time earth seemed to have no Dharma ? Strange how God allowed them a free reign on the earth for such a long time, for they did not pray or build any temples or serve others. Was it their fault that their brains were too small? God did not let man wait even a few thousand years before he sent help. Even animals of today seem to follow the Natural Law but man seems to be the only species that needs to be reminded in principle of living a true life or be instructed in the right way by the Guru .The point is related to time and the purpose of that supposed chaos and lack of religion on this earth and to draw attention to how 'old' or 'new' God is.

 
Do share your immediate thoughts or reactions on this issue? We value your views! Login Now! or Sign Up Today! to share your views with us.. Gurfateh!

__________________
sBu ko bolY Awpx BwxY ] Everyone speaks as they please.

Sinner veer some comments,

Sinner says .....man seems to be the only species that needs to be redeemed of his sins or be instructed in the right way .
Sat Sri Akal.

we need to look at the SIKH GURUS (Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji) without wearing the different coloured lenses of other religions...original sin..secondary sin..the redeemer..son of god and son of man..prophets prophecies etc etc miracles, seas parting and rains of frogs, etc etc have to be kept OUT./ASIDE.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/leisure/37023-dinosaur-and-dharma.html
GURU NANAK is a Compeletly NEW WAY..away from the well beaten 'paths"....if we wear GREEN coloured lenses..we see his a "sufi muslim" ( as the Ahmidiyahs do)...if we wear Jesus Christ branded eyewear..we see original sin, redeeming necessary etc etc..and try to find all that when GURU NANAK JI didnt even say a single word about that...Guru nanak Ji must eb seen with our own ORIGINAL pair of untainted EYES...to see Him as he truly is...the GURU NANAK...

It is quite apparent from many of Sinner ji's posts that he is often confused between the Abrahamical and other religions; and Sikhi.He also seems to be confused between Ik Ong Kaar and the Abrahamical God.

I would urge him to read about these religions which can be found in many threads in this very forum so that he can be the Truthseeker he wants to be.

Thank you all, I realise that my words sometimes use phrases which I picked up from School but don't focus on one line read ,it was time on my mind,my learned Sikhs does 'Sikhi' believe in time, or in a time to send the Guru or manifest himself and is a Natural Religion possible.Please be kind I'm a fragile soul.

Thanks Sinner ji for clearly describing your objective of finding a Natural Religion, if one is possible. Just to request that Sikhism's tenets and the shabads of the Guru Sahibs not be a springboard for doing so. This can be misunderstood as undermining Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

Some others might want to argue that Sikhism is a natural religion and Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is its scripture. If that is the case, then the shabads must be understood in the context of all of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, and tuks must be understood in the contest of a shabad, and the interpretation must be given. Then the rest can decide if your understanding is consistent with Gurmat....wisdom of the Guru. Thanks.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=37023

See that is why I have moved several threads to leisure or business and lifestyle. The discussions are worthy and we need to have them. However, slipping in and out of many of the threads are reflections that take liberties with a reasonable understanding of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and the tenets of Sikhi. This causes bitterness when it continues. They cannot be part of the Sikh Sikhism Sikhi forum for reasons I have given.

Spnadmin Ji, I understand your fear,but I'm at home here, no agenda to undermine Sikhi, I made the question and title as entertaining as possible, because I was in the leisure section,just being the entertainment and as I'm late finding the site I try to extend the boundaries of discourse, as in seven years most things will have been covered in the Sikhi section.Perhaps I should be in the mad musketeer section?
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=37023
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=37023
Appreciate the nudge

I think with a little nudge now and then you will find the boundaries. Over the years the forum has had to tighten up on the boundaries for Sikh Sikhi Sikhism. Early in our life cycle things were pretty loose and easy. Over time this turned out to be a liability. So you will find in the past year or so many threads have been moved to other sections. In some cases we have also begun new subforums to meet a need. Thank you.

Just to reply to those posts although to qualify we are not in the Sikhi section just a personal discussion,Veer Ji, Tejwant Singh JI The consesus view being that Ik Onkaar can't be defined, then how can you say with any certaintity that he is not like something ,whether it be Abrahmanical or otherwise.

Head of the Musketeers,Where does Sikhi specifically say sins can't be redeemed or deny the Son of Man.It is what we believe that Sikhi believes that is the problem.Sikhi cannot exist without you who interprets ,so Sikhi does not actually believe, it is we that believe it does. Take the example that most baptised Sikhs are vegetarian, yet 'Sikhi does not beleive in that' it but millions perhaps believe that Sikhi believes in that .
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=37023
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=37023

Gyani Ji ,It is newer by comparison but Guru Ji made no reference to 'going away from the paths/faiths of the day,what he said was do what you are doing in the rightway.