Claims in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib are False

sikhimylife · #1 (**permalink**) 04-Oct-2011, 16:33 PM

http://www.bayanimills.com/2011/10/0...-granth-sahib/

These are not my opinions but of a publisher by the name of Bayani Mills, I actually think the publisher is taking what Guru Ji is saying out of context and would to get more speculation from Sikhs of how they perceive what the Guru is saying. Then I'll just let my mind contemplate the replies

The Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji makes many vague and subjective statements, many of which are simple musings, interpreted to mean various things, and much if the rest can be derived from general observations.

Claims in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib are false
Many Sikh maintain the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is “100% true”, so I’ll present some of the blatantly false statements made in the GGS about the cosmos.

Guru Granth Sahib states:
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-sikhi-sikhism/37125-claims-sri-guru-granth-sahib-false.html
“From this primal void, came the moon, the sun and the earth.”
Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji p1037

This is wrong.

We know that the Earth, Moon, and the Sun need particular elements to form them – they is not pop in to existence, nor were they instantaneously created.

Big Bang nucleosynthesis refers to the production of nuclei other than those of H-1. Big Bang nucleosynthesis begins about three minutes after the Big Bang, when the universe has cooled down sufficiently to form stable protons and neutrons, after baryogenesis.

Big Bang nucleosynthesis produced no elements heavier than beryllium, due to a bottleneck: the absence of a stable nucleus with 8 or 5 nucleons. In stars, the bottleneck is passed by triple collisions of helium-4 nuclei, producing carbon (the triple-alpha process). However, this process is very slow, taking tens of thousands of years to convert a significant amount of helium to carbon in stars, and therefore it made a negligible contribution in the minutes following the Big Bang.

The formation of the elements that made our solar system took billions of years to come together to eventually form the Sun, the Earth, and the Moon.

Guru Granth Sahib states:
“From this primal void, came the four sources of creation, and the power of speech.”
Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji p1037

Language has emerged out of the social nature of primates that have evolved over hundreds of thousands of years – it was not created.

Guru Granth Sahib states:
“You created the vast expanse of the Universe with One Word! Hundreds of thousands of rivers began to flow.”
Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji p3

This is wrong for the same reasons as stated earlier about Big Bang nucleosynthesis.

Water requires hydrogen and oxygen, not available at the beginning of the universe. Oxygen had to be created through the formation of stars. There is no way “rivers” started to flow.

Guru Granth Sahib states:
“The limits of the created universe cannot be perceived. Its limits here and beyond cannot be perceived. Many struggle to know His limits, but His limits cannot be found. No one can know these limits.”
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=37125
Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji p5

This is wrong.

We CAN perceive these expanding limits, in fact we have, and we know that The Universe is 13.7 billion years old with an increasing rate of accuracy.

Guru Granth Sahib states:
“Creating the sun and the moon, He infused His Light into them. He created the night and the day; Wondrous are His miraculous plays.”
Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji p1279

This is wrong.

The moon does not emit light, it reflects the light from the sun. We can even demonstrate how it happens.

spnadmin · #2 (**permalink**) 04-Oct-2011, 17:40 PM

Quote:

These are not my opinions but of a publisher by the name of Bayani Mills, I actually think the publisher is taking what Guru Ji is saying out of context and would to get more speculation from Sikhs of how they perceive what the Guru is saying. Then I'll just let my mind contemplate the replies

sikhmylife ji,

I agree with you. The copy of the article could with reflection on the part of all be a very interesting discussion.

But.... something about the arguments against Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji claims seem almost childish. As if the scientist could not help being so literal. I found myself laughing. Wondering now if others share my reaction. And wondering what their reasons are.

Ishna · #3 (**permalink**) 04-Oct-2011, 18:19 PM

I just shake my head and shrug. It is all very literal, and if you read the Gurbani and get swept into the rhythm of it (even in poxy ol' English) it makes beautiful sense all in context and all as an awesome song of WOW.

The author seems to be focusing on only those tuks which mention creation. The author neglects that the Big Bang Theory is still a Theory (as well as a TV show... come on, you knew I'd slip TV in there, hehe). And as any good scientist should know, you can't take your theory as proven until it's proven and the only way I can imagine humans can prove it is by reproducing it. Gurbani makes no claims to talk about the how or when the universe was created, it is not the subject matter of the text! (I say 'text' with all due respect to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji _/\_ ).
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=37125

I think the aim of these tuks is to expand the mind of the reader and bring it to it's metaphorical knees with awe that we are so tinsie tinie and the Creative Force is so totally immense and wonderous.

At Gurbani class on Sunday, I really enjoyed it when Uncle Ji got all excited with moustaches bristling, eyes gleaming, giggling, almost jumping out of his chair telling us how our earth, in our galaxy, if you look at it in the context of the UNIVERSE, would be like a grain of sand on the end of your fingertip. And we are in there with our arrogance and our pride - we are so small!
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=37125

Back to the proper subject of the thread however... The author seems to confuse Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji with other religious scriptures which indeed claim to be scientific thesis. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is not like that. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is the thesis of the poetry of the soul and needs to be read with the right side of the brain, not the left.

Ambarsaria · #4 (**permalink**) 04-Oct-2011, 21:25 PM

I can take lines/tuks from Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, use some imagination in interpreting with a taint of convenience and prove what I want! So what is the issue.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=37125
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=37125

I take complete shabads, gurbani compositions and whole of Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji and it all falls by the wayside.

You need imagination to understand or create non-sense, I suppose some choose the latter.

Sat Sri Akal.

prakash.s.bagga · #5 (**permalink**) 04-Oct-2011, 22:41 PM

I think that the person making interpretation of the quote pp1037,he has confused himself with the proper meaning of the word "Sunnum" in the given quote. Here the meaning of the word Sunnum is being considered as "Void" so he feels that the claims in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji are false.
We can look at the actual meaning of the word 'Sunnum" as reference for the Non Active State of the matter of the Universe then the meanings of the quote would become more clear and true.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=37125
Therefore knowing the reference meaning of particular word is very impotant before any conlusion is given on any claims to be true or false in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=37125
Prakash.S.Bagga

Randip Singh · #6 (**permalink**) 05-Oct-2011, 00:07 AM

Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is not a scientific journal. It uses metaphors and symbolism to illustrate points.

Seeker9 · #7 (**permalink**) 05-Oct-2011, 01:37 AM

Quote:

“From this primal void, came the moon, the sun and the earth.”
Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji p1037

This is wrong.

There was nothing, then something happened (Big Bang) and today we see lots of things including the Sun, Moon and Earth. It does not require a lot of imagination to interpret in this way

Quote:

We know that the Earth, Moon, and the Sun need particular elements to form them – they is not pop in to existence, nor were they instantaneously created.

Irrelevant including all the waffle afterwards about Big Bang nucleosynthesis as I would not interpret the above in this way

Quote:

“From this primal void, came the four sources of creation, and the power of speech.”
Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji p1037

Language has emerged out of the social nature of primates that have evolved over hundreds of thousands of years – it was not created.

Ok

Quote:

Guru Granth Sahib states:
“You created the vast expanse of the Universe with One Word! Hundreds of thousands of rivers began to flow.”

Quote:

This is wrong for the same reasons as stated earlier about Big Bang nucleosynthesis.

More waffle and a complete waste of time. Why even attempt to reconcile religion and science? Science may recognise Word as a Word and not a reference to a creative power. And when the World was in place, rivers did flow as they do today

Quote:

Guru Granth Sahib states:
“The limits of the created universe cannot be perceived. Its limits here and beyond cannot be perceived. Many struggle to know His limits, but His limits cannot be found. No one can know these limits.”
Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji p5

This is wrong.

We CAN perceive these expanding limits, in fact we have, and we know that The Universe is 13.7 billion years old with an increasing rate of accuracy.

This measure is from the point of singularity that is called the Big Bang. It does not account for what may have existed prior to that point

In terms of Onkar, there are no scientific metrics

Quote:

Guru Granth Sahib states:
“Creating the sun and the moon, He infused His Light into them. He created the night and the day; Wondrous are His miraculous plays.”
Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji p1279

This is wrong.

The moon does not emit light, it reflects the light from the sun. We can even demonstrate how it happens

.

Yes but I wonder how much is lost in translation

As a whole I found the essay pointless and the pompous analysis amusing

Thanks

Seeker9 · #8 (**permalink**) 05-Oct-2011, 01:44 AM

Re my lost in translation point I have just noticed this fine thread:
http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/essays...converted.html

Ambarsaria · #9 (**permalink**) 05-Oct-2011, 11:30 AM

spnadmin ji this thread Title is in violation of the spn TOS. When you click on the link the title is totally different.

Couple other things to note,

A kid/young man is trying to look for sensationalism for his belief as stated in the article, http://www.bayanimills.com/the-author/) and he seemed to be looking for straws and some mis-interpreted story about Nasa was manouvered (Bayani Mills was the challenger to the possibly mis-guided Sikh)
The other stuff is he said/she said with plug for United Punjab website and Giani Sohan Singh Seetal, I don't know much about him personally

The revised article at the quoted URL and it already debunks in the same blog that "literals" are wrong (a view restated by Bayani Mills later in this thread, thanks to Bayani Mills) to be used for Sri Guru Granth Sahib.,

Quote:

Divine Insight: Does NASA consult the Guru Granth Sahib?

On October 1, 2011, in Other, by Bayani Mills

Of course not.
But, it was something proposed by a Sikh I work with. Perhaps “proposed” is a rather weak term. It was something he was fiercely adamant about. He claimed that NASA consults the Sri Guru Granth Sahib (Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji) for answers to the cosmos and that the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji had divine knowledge not known to man at the time.
[Update]: Due to criticisms, I will point out that this is not about *my* interpretation of the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. I note that this opened recounting that a Sikh I know asserts the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is “literally” true.
If you wish to use the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji to reflect on how awesome the universe is, to inspire you to act, go ahead.
The purpose is to:
1) demonstrate that the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji *can not* be taken literally. If you assert that it should be taken literally, you will be shown to be wrong.
2) debunk the myth that NASA “consults” the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji to answer questions about the Universe.
[End Update]
His source was a “news” website. The story seems to have spread since June 2007 as referenced here, and tracking the specific source was made easier with the waybackmachine. The author, Manpreet Singh noted in a blog comment that people had been asking for evidence; apparently with none, he felt that his initial claims have now been validated by this article seven months after the fact.

Note also in reference to the stupidity of escalating hearsay,

Quote:

if nasa has guru granth saheb and no other religious book,then it is important but if they have all other religious books along with guru granth saheb then it may be their policy.

Sat Sri Akal.