Welcome to SPN

Register and Join the most happening forum of Sikh community & intellectuals from around the world.

Sign Up Now!

Are The Important Scriptures Of World Religions, Simply Opinions?

Discussion in 'Interfaith Dialogues' started by sunmukh, Sep 30, 2010.

  1. sunmukh

    sunmukh
    Expand Collapse
    (Previously Himmat Singh)
    SPNer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    134
    Hi Lovely people:

    Just wanted your opinion on this to see if it worth trying to discuss anything civilly, and thus submitting any posts on this forum:

    I am self-confessed Dasam Granth cynic. I don't believe in its authorship, and don't need the Dasam Granth anyway, as I have Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji and God to guide me, and that is more than enough for me. I am also very much against excluding people who believe in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji and one God alone, from being treated by defined Sikhs as sikhs because they don't keep all rehat.

    I wrote this on another forum but the comment was termed offensive to Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, and it was given as the reason why I was immediately banned temporarily from the site:

    "All holy texts, and that includes the Bible, Koran, Vedas,Torah and now Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji as well, are ALL opinion."

    I based this on stanza 3 of japji Sahib.

    Question to you: "Would you see this as such an offensive comment, that such thoughts should not be allowed to be expressed on a Sikh forum? "

    Personally, I do not take anybody past or present, as a prophet/messenger/ambassador of God, so therefore anybody writing scriptures had to be giving an opinion,, albeit very wise words. I think this is in accord with Japji Sahib, and Guru Nanak Dev ji recognised the same after his great investigations into many religions and practices.

    It is unbelievable that some Sikhs, have sunk to such levels that they resort to trying to stop people from expressing such thoughts, even when these people such as myself openly confess to have faith in only Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji and One God. Even if I saw myself as a muslim, hindu or something else, what I wrote was no big deal. This paranoia in some Sikhs is bad news as it shows some are now very intolerant and live in deep fear of what their children, or non-sikhs, will learn from opinions expressed on the internet. Banning people from self-expression stinks of attitude of Taliban type Muslims, and it is an ironic tragedy it comes from successors of Sikhs who suffered greatly from persecution.

    I look forward to hearing from you.

    Sat Sri Akal

    Himmat Singh
     
  2. Loading...

    Similar Threads Forum Date
    How Important are Shastars (Weapons) to Sikhism? Questions and Answers Feb 21, 2011
    Why moral values are important Spiritual Articles Jul 17, 2010
    Is the process of Becoming more important than what we are? Interfaith Dialogues Jul 28, 2004
    USA Waris Ahluwalia Day! New York City Declares Day After Sikh-American Actor Breaking News Oct 21, 2016
    Do You Know Who You Are? New to Sikhism Oct 13, 2016

  3. spnadmin

    spnadmin United States
    Expand Collapse
    1947-2014 (Archived)
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    14,551
    Likes Received:
    19,200
    Re: Dasam Granth Cynics Now Attacking Guru Granth Sahib

    Himmat Singh ji

    You should give us an opportunity. The comment is not deleted; however, I have moved it to its own thread for independent discussion.

    Please check your private messages. :)
     
  4. Seeker9

    Seeker9 United Kingdom
    Expand Collapse
    Cleverness is not wisdom
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    973
    Re: Are the important scriptures of world religions simply opinions?

    Good question

    A good test for any Scripture would be to consider the answers to the following questions:

    1) Who actually wrote it? Humans? (i.e did Jesus write any part of the Bible? Did the Prophet Mohammed write any part of the Koran)

    2) Do the Scriptures still remain in their first and original form or do we only have access to translations?

    3) Have the Scriptures been changed in any way, e.g old bits taken aaway, new bits added, and then x thousand years later, some old bits found again in earthen jars in caves and appear to contradict the currently accepted version...(I/m referring to the Dead Sea Scrolls here and the Councils of Nicea and their impact on The Bible!)

    When you apply these questions to any Scriptures then Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji very much stands out from the crowd!
    :blueturban:

    Edited post:
    Just realised I forgot a very important fourth element! So to the above list I would add:

    4) Timing / When were the Scriptures written? - were they written at the time the people and events they portary occurred? Or were they written decades even centuries later?
     
    • Like Like x 4
    #3 Seeker9, Sep 30, 2010
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 12, 2010
  5. sunmukh

    sunmukh
    Expand Collapse
    (Previously Himmat Singh)
    SPNer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    134
    Re: Are the important scriptures of world religions simply opinions?

    Ek OnKaar Sat Naam

    Thank you for your response Seeker9 ji.

    I completely agree it is possible to rank scriptures. Using such criteria as you list it is possible to select the ones that meet or exceed the set criteria.

    SGGS ji does stand out for me, but to be fair, I only come to this conclusion from my upbringing, and without reading anything other than part of the new testament, the book of genesis, and very, very few snippets from buddhist and hindu works.
    Had I been born into another faith, I expect I would have seen that faith as standing out above the crowd as well.

    The point you made about when scriptures were written will usually make a difference with regards to authenticity - how much any scriptures can be expected to be in accord with the original "prophets'" scripts/words.

    However, setting any points about authenticity, reliablity, and even merit aside, the point I was attempting to make was that absolutely all scriptures are based on the thoughts arising in somebody or another's mind, rather than through actual factual knowledge of God.

    This makes them all opinion, and based on such a presumption that they have no subtantive evidence to support them, with regards to God, (rather than human behavioural traits), this makes everyone elses opinion on the same subject matter (God) potentially just as valuable, as what is already recorded in any scriptures.

    This is what I was trying to suggest when I was informed this was very offensive to SGGS ji.

    Of course it challenges current opinions about Sikhi. However any seekers of truth, in my opinion, should not be afraid of challenging any norms. If Guru Nanak Dev ji had not done so then Sikhi would not be what it is today.

    The stanza I used at that time to support this claim that all the claims with regards to God in SGGS ji are based on opinion alone and that Guru Nanak Dev ji was of the same opinion, that they were all opinion, was pauri 3 in japji Sahib:



    I did not get a chance to elaborate further, but I will try to here:

    To me this is quite clear cut. Guru Nanak is reconising that all the opinions about God are mere stories and there are countless variations of them. Regardless of their nature, people swallow the stories untill they tire and move on to a revised or new version. Regardless of the stories, it is the One who positions us, by virtue of His Hukam, to listen to such tales. When one recognises them to be nothing but tales, then one breaks the bonds and chains to the set established norms of any religion, as one shifts from attachment from religion, to attachment to God (ie a higher plane). It leaves one enlightened, liberated or emancipated (from religion) ie neither Hindu/Mussalman (or an attached Sikh), but still worshipping God.

    There is of course much more bani to support Guru Nanak's opinion that nobody really knows the nature of God:

    eg:

    P5:

    If Guru Nanak Dev ji, the founder of Sikhi, does not know everything, and is not afraid to say so, then what is the problem of some current day sikhs when someone else says SGGS ji expresses opinion alone? Why should this be offensive? I would have thought, they would be pleased to note that Guru ji is not so arrogant to claim all knwledge of God, like some adherents to faiths with prophets do, when they claim their prophets were all knowing. However it seems to me a number of "sikhs" have now become very intolerant gatekeepers to the current norms of "their" religion, yet don't even consider just how perceptive and tolerant Guru Nanak was. He and subsequent gurus made sikhi universal, as evidenced in SGGS ji, but current sikhs have shut up shop and pulled down the shutters, with arrows pointed outwards through holes in the shutters, at anybody who comments on SGGS ji. Their first and foremost thought is to protect the Guru. I guess they are attached not to the universal truth of the bani, and hence to God, but to the form of Guru ji. I further guess that whilst in that state, they cannot progress spiritually and cannot move from being a sikh of the guru, in deference to the guru, to becoming a sikh of the lord, with no religion - neither Hindu, Mussalman or Sikh. The shabd will not strike their hearts, as their hearts are not attached to bani and the message it carries, but is attached to one particular manifestation of the Lord. The all pervasivenes of the Lord can never be recognised in this fashion, if one worships and protects one form of the Lord but not the next. "sarbat da bhalla" cannot be realised and never will be fully realised, as sarbat is ranked.

    Let us look at more bani:

    P875:
    Guru ji, via Naam Dev, is pointing to worship of the Lord and not to worship of the trappings of a religion.

    P327:

    Guru ji, via Kabeer ji, speaks of hindus' offerings of gold to the Lord (whch persists to this day)but states this cannot buy the Lord; some sikhs make big offerings as well; Guru ji speaks of the Hindu scriptures - Brahma could not fully describe the Lord (as no-one can); Guru ji advises to worship the Lord alone and not the trappings of religion.

    P83:


    Guru Ram Das ji advises to worship the One Lord alone. This will remove all doubts and fear, including the fears in the hearts of gatekeepers of religions. Religions are God's paths, so there is no fear of losing what he creates, destroys and recreates.

    P66:

    a) Guru Amar Das ji goes into the overriding nature of the Grace of the Lord (not of the practices of a religion). He will do as He pleases, so any readers should not get emotionally attached to any religion
    b) The Truth is already within - no need to look outside
    c) Follow the Guru - this reference to Guru is not any arrogant reference to Guru Amar Das ji, not Guru Angad Dev ji and not Guru Nanak Dev ji. This is Sat Guru, the ever resident Guru within, the best friend of the soul, the sajan that one works to meet, one can then interact with and one asks to introduce one to the Lord. It is the seed of the Lord within, that bestows inner conscience, that shows flamingoes offspring that are left behind, on how to feed and grow, and become parents themselves - it is innate knowledge - and is hence, yet again an incitation to break free from the chains of religion, and shift to worship of the One Lord
    p10 and p495:

    d) The Lord alone is the ambrosial fruit. The Gurmukh is the tree, and in this context is now SGGS ji. We know SGGS ji embodies the joyt of liberated Gurmukhs, Guru Sahiban. However Guru ji is not saying we should be like the birds that fly around the tree. Reading the shabd should not result in stopping at the tree and worshipping the tree, or flitting in and around it. Reading the shabd should be engendering love for the One Lord, and causing one to settle on the tree with real purpose, that being to peck at the fruit ; if God so wills, this could yield the fruit - the Lord Himself. Ignorance of the fruit yet with knowledge of the tree, will leave one like the birds that fly around the trees, but never enjoy the fruit.

    Sat Sri Akal​
     
    • Like Like x 1
  6. Seeker9

    Seeker9 United Kingdom
    Expand Collapse
    Cleverness is not wisdom
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    973
    Re: Are the important scriptures of world religions simply opinions?

    Dear Sunmukh Ji

    Many thanks for an interesting and thought-provoking post

    Some thoughts I would offer in return:

    Hmmnn...The Gurus and the Bhagats had achieved a level of knowledge and experience well beyond average had they not?

    Generally yes, but one would hope the contributors to SGGSJ were drawing more on actual knowledge and experience and less on opinion. But it is a very interesting viewpoint that does in a way highlight again the unique integrity of the Sikh Scriptures in terms of who wrote them and when

    With you on that one!

    I am a complete novice re the Bani, but I can understand the way you have interpreted it.

    I also like to think of SGGSj as an instruction manual written by experts...so you're right, unlike other scriptures, it does not contain a lot of pie in the sky nonsense about the nature of the afterlife and God and other spiritual beings..... but it does contain a method for achieving spiritual enlightenment...which has to be experienced and cannot be put into words

    I was not offended by anything in your post and enjoyed reading it

    Thanks
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. spnadmin

    spnadmin United States
    Expand Collapse
    1947-2014 (Archived)
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    14,551
    Likes Received:
    19,200
    Re: Are the important scriptures of world religions simply opinions?

    I asked this question earlier, and it seems to have disappeared. Opinion and truth are two different things, in fact irreconcilably different. How then is it possible for a scripture like Sri Guru Granth Sahib to be both an expression of Guru Nanak's opinion and a banee of truth?

    QFT This question was asked earlier in the day and is referenced to the most recent comments by sunmukh ji. :)
     
    • Like Like x 5
    #6 spnadmin, Nov 10, 2010
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2010
  8. Tejwant Singh

    Tejwant Singh United States
    Expand Collapse
    Mentor Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,560
    Likes Received:
    6,989
    Himmat Singh ji,

    Guru Fateh.

    You write:

    So am I and my position is expressed quite nitidly in many posts in various threads here in this forum.

    Yes, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is our only Guru, our Teacher, our Guide, our only GPS, not for any theological reasons but for the pragmatic ones on which Sikhi way of life is based. I have no idea what you mean by the word God in Sikhi because, again as my other posts would indicate that Ik Ong Kaar is not god as considered in other faiths because god is based on dogmas of the particular religion and the demarcation of each of them is very clear and is visible from their dogmatic fences. Sikhi has nothing to do with any dogmas. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, our only Guru is its proof. Pragmatism needs no dogma. The best is explained in the first Pauri of Jap which shows us that TRUTH needs no dogmatic crutches of any belief system. It stands on its own. Thus, Sikhi is not a belief system as other religions are.

    Here, you are mixing apples and oranges, I am afraid. Sikhi is a gumbo of oral traditions, oral history and Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, our only Guru. If the first two do not compliment the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, then one can not have a Sikhi tripod on which its kaleidoscope stands for all of us to look through it.

    What do you mean by “don't keep all rehat”? How would you define the Sehajdharis? Did all who gathered on the Vaisakhi day of 1699 take khandei di pahul that day?

    I would appreciate if you would clarify your thoughts on that.

    I have no idea which forums you have been visiting and have no interest in knowing that either, nor am I interested in their reasons for the ban. I have a basic problem with your claim because to me it lacks coherence. Your claim is bewildering to say the least.

    Before we go any further, let’s check the definitions of o•pin•ion and hear•say

    o•pin•ion
       [uh-pin-yuh n] Show IPA
    –noun
    1.
    a belief or judgment that rests on grounds insufficient to produce complete certainty.
    2.
    a personal view, attitude, or appraisal.
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/opinion

    hear•say
       [heer-sey] Show IPA
    –noun
    1.
    unverified, unofficial information gained or acquired from another and not part of one's direct knowledge: I pay no attention to hearsay.
    2.
    an item of idle or unverified information or gossip; rumor: a malicious hearsay.
    –adjective
    3.
    of, pertaining to, or characterized by hearsay: hearsay knowledge; a hearsay report.
    Origin:
    1525–35; orig. in phrase by hear say, trans. of MF par ouïr dire

    —Synonyms
    1. talk, scuttlebutt, babble, tittle-tattle.
    http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hearsay

    All the above scriptures except Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji are nothing but based on hearsays, hence can not be opinions of the original authors. Would you be kind enough to elaborate on your claim?

    “I based this on stanza 3 of japji Sahib.”

    What do you mean by the above? Please elaborate your basis according to the definitions given above.

    Once you are able to distinguish between the two, then the answer is self evident.

    Sikhi is not based on “prophet/messenger/ambassador of God” as these are all based on dogmas which has nothing to do with Sikhi. There is a thread where Prophecy is discussed from the Sikhi view point in great length. I would suggest you to go through that and share your thoughts.

    Once again, hearsays can not be opinions. Secondly, a pragmatic vision and usage of common sense is not an opinion either. To express this a bit further, I would like to use our oral Sikh history and also Gurbani. When Guru Nanak started throwing water to the West in Haridwar while Hindus were throwing towards the East is not an opinion but just common sense. The same could also be said about the episode in Mecca when Guru Nanak’s feet were facing the holy site of the Muslims and he asked the mullah to move them in the direction where Ik Ong Kaar IS NOT.

    It is not an opinion when Guru Nanak says in Japji pauri 22:

    ਪਾਤਾਲਾ ਪਾਤਾਲ ਲਖ ਆਗਾਸਾ ਆਗਾਸ ll
    Pāṯālā pāṯāl lakẖ āgāsā āgās.

    "There are innumeral planets/galaxies and Milky ways".

    So,pardon my ignorance but I fail to understand what you mean by opinion.

    I am not here to judge others but to interact and learn from this process. Sikhi is the journey of the individual and of the individual only. Each one of us carry our own spiritual torch and only Ik Ong Kaar knows which milestone we as individuals are at. Neither myself, nor you or anyone else can find it out no matter how much we pretend to delve into it.

    Thanks & regards

    Tejwant Singh
     
    • Like Like x 5
  9. sunmukh

    sunmukh
    Expand Collapse
    (Previously Himmat Singh)
    SPNer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    134
    Ek OnKaar Sat Naam

    Dear Seeker9 ji

    Thanks for your further post.

    Indeed, very much above average.

    Sat Sri Akal
     
  10. findingmyway

    findingmyway
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer Contributor Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Messages:
    1,667
    Likes Received:
    3,767
    Re: Are the important scriptures of world religions simply opinions?


    Sunmukh Ji,
    Please can I request that you also include the original Gurmukhi in your posts. I find English translations very misleading and would appreciate the opportunity to check my own understanding from the origincal shabads. Thank you.

    Regarding the above statement, like any good teacher Guru Nanak Dev Ji knows his limitations. However, that does not invalidate his entire teachings as mere opinion! If an English teacher is asked a physics question or the physics teacher is asked about quantom mechanics, of which they haven't as much knowledge, does that mean everything else those teachers have taught becomes invalid? Guru Nanak Dev Ji admits that nobody can describe all the attributes of God but that does not mean that what he did describe is any less factual.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  11. spnadmin

    spnadmin United States
    Expand Collapse
    1947-2014 (Archived)
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    14,551
    Likes Received:
    19,200
    Re: Are the important scriptures of world religions simply opinions?

    I am still struggling with the assertion that Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji is an opinion.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  12. sunmukh

    sunmukh
    Expand Collapse
    (Previously Himmat Singh)
    SPNer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    134
    Ek OnKaar Sat Naam

    Dear SPNadmin ji

    Thanks for your post - I don't know what happened to the earlier post !

    Some ways of looking at Truth:

    The ones who perceive somebody's ideas as Truth will not have any doubts as to whether it is Truth or not. Their minds will believe it is Truth whether it is true or not. eg Muslims with no doubts will believe Koran to represent Truth, and strong minded Christians will believe the Bible to be Truth and so on.

    On the other hand all opinions, whether written up in a Bible, Vedas, Koran or Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji ji could all be regarded as variant manifestations of the Truth. As there is only the One, then all variations are part of the same, and in this case my opinion, your opinion, or anybody else's opinion becomes as valid as anybody elses, past, present or future.

    Writings seen in scriptures are all based on what the author thought and then decided to write, whether it was written directly by a founder of a religion or a subsequent scribe hundreds of years later. The true Truth itself, just as you say, cannot be categorically reconciled with mere opinion. For example it takes God to know God. However, as the Truth is unknown and cannot be known as it is quite limitless, all that can be witnessed and known to a human mind is opinions, or somebody's ideas. They may be perceived by others to be supremely wise, agreeable, logical and reasonable, but ultimately it is the author's creative imagination and thoughts that resulted in the scriptures seen today.


    Sat Sri Akal
     
  13. spnadmin

    spnadmin United States
    Expand Collapse
    1947-2014 (Archived)
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    Jun 17, 2004
    Messages:
    14,551
    Likes Received:
    19,200
    If we follow your argument to its logical conclusion then Sri Guru Granth Sahib is manmukh and manmat.


    After the word "jap" in japji Sahib ji we read

    ਆਦਿ ਸਚੁ ਜੁਗਾਦਿ ਸਚੁ ॥

    aadh sach jugaadh sach ||

    आदि सचु जुगादि सचु ॥

    True In The Primal Beginning. True Throughout The Ages.

    ਹੈ ਭੀ ਸਚੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਹੋਸੀ ਭੀ ਸਚੁ ॥੧॥

    hai bhee sach naanak hosee bhee sach ||1||

    है भी सचु नानक होसी भी सचु ॥१॥

    True Here And Now. O Nanak, Forever And Ever True. ||1||

    It seems also that you projecting various opinions onto the cinema screen and then commenting about that. Which evades my question.

    So we return to place of bewilderment. How can "True" be an "Opinion?"
     
    • Like Like x 3
  14. sunmukh

    sunmukh
    Expand Collapse
    (Previously Himmat Singh)
    SPNer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    134
    Ek OnKaar Sat Naam

    Dear Tejwant Singh ji

    Gurfateh ji

    Thank you for your post.


    I am not, at the moment, convinced that Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is not based on theological reasons. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji ji appears to me to have been compiled principally to enshrine the theological studies and conclusions of Sikh Gurus and Bhagats.

    There also appears to me to be great emphasis on "God". Whether "God" is referenced as "Ik Ong Kaar", parmeswar, brahma, prabhu, parmatama, or not seems to be a technical point. However I will search for your previous posts on this site, that go into this point, and if need be will come back to you to discuss further, if you also wish to.

    I fully agree with you that Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji ji does not set out a dogmatic way of life. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji ji on its own does not prescribe a proscriptive way of life, but does provide much spiritual guidance, and intimates principles of socially tolerant, constructive and truthful conduct.


    I wrote:
    Quote:
    <TABLE border=0 cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1><TBODY><TR><TD style="BORDER-BOTTOM: 1px inset; BORDER-LEFT: 1px inset; BORDER-TOP: 1px inset; BORDER-RIGHT: 1px inset" class=alt2>I am also very much against excluding people who believe in Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji and one God alone, from being treated by defined Sikhs as sikhs because they don't keep all rehat. </TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>


    and you kindly replied:

    This is a very deep topic. It is not really appropriate to discuss it with respect to scriptures being the result of humans' imaginations.
    Very briefly, it is based on the outcome of the Gurleen Kaur vs SGPC Indian High Court case, in which people who claimed to be sikhs and previously acknowledged by all their relatives and local society to be sikhs, who believed in and held up Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji as their Guru and beleived in only one God, were deemed to be non-sikhs as a result of trimming their eyebrows. These people, including myself (as I trim my beard occasionally) were essentially left in limbo with no religion. I deeply resent that, as I see it as a most intolerant action on part of the ones left as Sikhs, which is a very small minority of those who claim to be sikh (including myself).


    Opinion/hearsay

    One definition you give for opinion is:

    I would say this applies well to what I am referring to.
    Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji has passages which refer to the Lord as unknowable. This confirms, IMHO, that what is written therein, and in other scriptures, with respect to the Lord, is based on the authors thoughts and judgement alone. Hence what is written with regards to the Lord is an act of faith (ie not absolute "Truth", or complete certainty"

    This act of faith is captured in this couplet:

    (Page: 3, Line: 8, Jap, Author: Guru Nanak Dev)




    I am not really referring to hearsay. Hearsay is akin to rumours, which then as a result of a "Chinese whispers" action can end up as nothing like the original comments/statements. Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji ji is quite authentic, although the oral traditions and history your referred to may have contentious elements, and may have a major bearing on what is now practised. That is bye the bye though, as it is scriptures I would be pleased to limit discussion to.

    I am not disputing the content of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji ji are authentic compositions, of the claimed contributors. All that I was intimating was that they are not revelations, not words of God, not sacred, not holy, but are written thoughts, that arose from human beings imaginations, albeit gifted human beings. They happen to convey messages, but ultimately the messages conveyed are perceptions of the authors. With this in mind, any statement that suggests that the compositions are opinion, should not be slammed as offensive. It may be insensitive to say this to Sikhs, but they should really be able to understand and stay calm.
    I am not into Guru worship, and only wish to learn from Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji ji and apply what I learn,, but I can easily bow to Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, and do so in defernce to Sikhs feelings. Likewise they should be able to tolerate expression of others opinions on discussion forums.

    Please forgive me, but I have to leave for the moment, but will answer your other queries and respond to the further points you made in another post.

    Sat Sri Akal
     
  15. Seeker9

    Seeker9 United Kingdom
    Expand Collapse
    Cleverness is not wisdom
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    973
    This is a fascinating discussion and I have enjoyed very much all contributions to date.

    With my limited knowledge and understanding I am trying to get my head around this deep discussion...

    In so far as the compilation of SGGS was not of the type of say God directly writing on tablets of stone with his finger which Moses subsequently presented to others, then yes I can see what Sunmukh Ji is saying

    But then let's look at who wrote the other great Scriptures and who wrote SGGS and compare them........having compared them then, if we conclude that the authors of SGGS, i.e the Gurus and Bhagats, were in a completely different world (never mind ballpark!) spiritually to the authors of the other texts, then I would ask, how important is the core question on this thread about opinion V truth?

    Like I said earlier, if we regard SGGS as an instruction manual written by world leading experts, unrivalled in their field by any other human at the time, then one can hopefully be satisfied they have drawn more on actual knowledge and experience than opinion....

    That's how I am trying to understand this discussion and hope it makes some sort of sense...

    :eek:rangesingh:
     
    • Like Like x 4
  16. sunmukh

    sunmukh
    Expand Collapse
    (Previously Himmat Singh)
    SPNer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    134
    Re: Are the important scriptures of world religions simply opinions?

    Ek OnKaar Sat Naam

    My apologies to you Findingmyway ji. I am always in two minds as to whether to include the original Gurmukhi as I get the sense its adding to the size of the posts. I will do so in future.

    I am not disputing the merit of any of the contributors opinions. I learn from them and am ignorant of their wisdom, and have so much to learn from them. We do not learn from pure facts alone. What I was suggesting is that in the final analysis that they are somebody's thoughts on an unknowable subject. The fact that it was openly declared that the actual knowledge of the Truth was missing, was very commendable. (I do not agree with you about the factual point)

    Sat Sri Akal
     
  17. findingmyway

    findingmyway
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer Contributor Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Messages:
    1,667
    Likes Received:
    3,767
    Sunmukh ji,
    Forgive me but a few things confuse me still. I looked up the meaning of theological just ot be sure:
    <table border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="4" width="100%"><tbody><tr class="tr3" valign="top"><td class="td3n1" align="right" width="1%">
    </td><td class="td3n2">based on God's revelation to man of his nature, his designs, and his will </td></tr></tbody></table>The Guru Granth Sahib Ji says we cannot FULLY know his nature, designs or will. I think you will agree that is the TRUTH. This is where the fact of the Guru Granth Sahib Ji being written by the original teachers comes in as that means the truth has not been distorted or misninterpreted by others.


    The name used does not matter but the fundamental belief is defining. In Sikhi, God is not a being or an entity but is present everywhere. Belief in God or otherwise does not affect Akaal Purakh's existence. This is a different concpet from other religions which try and second guess everything. The Guru Granth Sahib Ji also goes way beyond belief in God-it is guidance for living.



    But if its opinion how do you know the conduct advised is truthful? An opinion cannot be described as truth! If you also refer back to spnadmin ji's post which quotes the 1st pauri of Japji by Guru Nanak Dev Ji an talks about truth, you saying that is opinion says you believ he was lying?!!!



    It sounds like you are confusing your bitterness with religion with belief in the Guru?




    Actually I would say the fact that Guru Ji admits that Waheguru is not completely knowable shows how truthful the Guru Granth Sahib Ji is, as Guru Ji is not making up things beyond what can be known by humans.



    Why follow them is the words are from imaginations? This is very contradictory in many ways so please explain.

    So far this discussion has been very calm. We are confused and asking for clarification-is that so wrong? Again I'm sensing bitterness from past experiences...


    Following the Guru Granth Sahib Ji is Guru worship. Applying it to your life is Guru worship. Bowing to it in a ritual motion is not!


    Has this forum not accpeted you expressing your opinion? However, in any discussion other viewpoints will also be expressed and we should all be able to hear those too.

    I look forward to your responses.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  18. sunmukh

    sunmukh
    Expand Collapse
    (Previously Himmat Singh)
    SPNer

    Joined:
    Feb 19, 2010
    Messages:
    108
    Likes Received:
    134
    Re: Are the important scriptures of world religions simply opinions?

    Ek OnKaar Sat Naam

    Dear SPNadmin ji

    Let's say you wrote a series of lyrics, and put them together. You were actually trying to convey a serious message, but chose to use song rather than by prose.You started to sing the lyrics and others liked them. Then others joined in and sang in the same manner, in the same vein. They also wrote on the same theme.

    If you happened to attract a lot of followers, and they continued to enjoy your songs even after your passing, and this continued for hundreds of years, does that imply that what you originally wrote was a result of your gifted creative and artistic skill, which you were able to utilise to change people's lives for the common good, or does it imply that you were sent by God for a purpose, or was holy, or was a sant or was God Himself ( as some people see Guru Nanak).

    Would you be content with people falling at your feet, or would you prefer them tp follow your advice based on your thoughts, research, analyis and conclusions. If you would not prefer them to fall at your feet now, even though you will not be here in the future, would you like to think they will worship your writings in the future?

    The point I am making is that although the advice comprised in SGGS ji is pure unadulterated wonderful wisdom, it is written by humans, based on their reasoning rather than actual knowledge of God (which they admit) and only arrogant humans would would wish their writings to be treated even more respectfully than they themselves would be in life, and even that would not nowadays include falling at their feet. Treatment of SGGS ji and issues of disrespect run against the actual way compassionate tolerant people think. (I am not referring to people who deliberately go out of their way to disrespect Guru ji - they are clearly out of order )

    Sat Sri Akal
     
    • Like Like x 1
  19. Seeker9

    Seeker9 United Kingdom
    Expand Collapse
    Cleverness is not wisdom
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    973
    Dear Sunmukh Ji

    I think I understand your line of reasoning

    The Gurus & Bhagats were human...but they were special as well

    Even if the physical process of creating SGGS on this Earth required human hands that put pen to paper, the resulting scriptures are a unique revelation, which you have also recognised

    I am continuing to enjoy this discussion and am not offended by it
     
    • Like Like x 1
  20. findingmyway

    findingmyway
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer Contributor Supporter

    Joined:
    Aug 18, 2010
    Messages:
    1,667
    Likes Received:
    3,767
    Re: Are the important scriptures of world religions simply opinions?

    Sunmukh Ji,
    Again I think you are confusing the way people behave now with the authenticity of the writings. These are 2 separate issues completely. The Guru Granth Sahib Ji shoud be treated with respect, this is not worship. Even if some people do behave in a worshipful way, it does not change the meaning of the original scriptures. It is illogical to judge the Guru on the way it is treated now :unsure:
     
    • Like Like x 3
  21. Seeker9

    Seeker9 United Kingdom
    Expand Collapse
    Cleverness is not wisdom
    SPNer Supporter

    Joined:
    May 3, 2010
    Messages:
    649
    Likes Received:
    973
    Just had another thought which I wanted to share.....

    Dear Sunmukh Ji

    If I have followed what you have said to date, I wonder if "opinion" is the best word to use?

    Are you also saying that by transferring anything to a written form puts it within the boundaries of that written form and this is not the same as actually experiencing something...i.e there is only so much that can be articulated via the written word?
     
    • Like Like x 2

Share This Page