Albert Einstein And Spirituality: From The Man Of Atom Bomb

[Caspian]

Okay, first the easy questions.

1. Is Ik Ong Kaar a he, she or it?

2. Is Ik Ong Kaar a deity like other gods that you have bundled Ik Ong kaar with in your previous posts?

1) If those three are my only options then I would have to say "It" but I am equally inclined to say all three or none of the above. I don't think the concept of god in Sikhism lends itself to easy characterization like that. "It" would be preferred in normal language use, just so we can talk about "It."

2) This point is contingent on whether or not the sikh god is impersonal or personal. I believe the sikh notion of god is impersonal (consequently, I don't believe in the compassion bit, but thats a different conversation although it is related to my answer). So if the sikh god is not personal, then it is not a deity in the same sense as other religions (like islam and christianity). However, the compassion bit which I mentioned above, personifies god in a personal manner (atleast to me It does—im open to any argument that can suggest that a god can be both impersonal and compassionate, kind or caring). If it happens to be the case that the sikh god IS personal (this is a position I believe the average sikh holds). Then to me, of course, that sikh god is a deity. And that kind of a god was the god I debated against in my earlier threads (like the 2+2=5 one) although I acknowledge that is probably not the right interpretation of the sikh god. I have to say the "impersonality" clashes heavily with the "compassionate" bit in my head.

A couple of more questions for you to ponder on and please do not worry, no one is trying to convince you not to be an Atheist or convert you but I would like you to be nitid about your belief on whatever it may be. What I have felt in your posts is a bit of bitterness towards Sikhi for some reason without really giving it a much thought what Sikhi is all about outside your own home and bundling it with other religions. One wonders why! You want to be accepted as an Atheist but it seems that it is difficult for you to accept others the way they are. Isn't acceptance part of AtheISM?

I wouldn't say I have a bitterness towards sikhi that borders on spite (which is the notion I think most people on this site assume, that I am doing this out of spite either at my parents or my community). I have a slightly negative attitude towards most religions (although I assure you, i'm far more negative towards christianity and islam then I am sikhism, that might not mean much to you though). And this negativity isnt really any form of "hatred," its more of a "scorn" akin to how quantum scientists look at string theorists—they just don't get along lol. Quantum scientists dont think that String theorists are crazy... but rather, they think that what they believe in doesnt really amount to "good" science and it contains an element of "faith" that goes above and beyond what is acceptable for a science. Having said that, they acknowledge that in the end, string theory may come out being true. So likewise, I feel that there are somethings that are holding Sikhism back from being a truly universal religion as it was intended on being (the 5 K's, etc) some of which are of no fault of the religion, but rather the disciples (silly stories and inconsistant belief between one sikh and another). Even though I'm willing to acknowledge that in the end, sikhism may very well be right—I disagree with how it was put in place and how it is being practiced. So most of my objections are with the practical side of sikhi and not so much the theory.

Its not that i dont accept you for who you are. By all means, be a sikh, remain a sikh, etc. But the same way you think I have not critically examined sikhism is what I think of many sikhs. I mean, me and you probably agree on more aspects of sikhism then me and the average sikh. Even the whole "god is impersonal" thing. Ill agree with you about that. But I feel like asking a question like that one i asked before (how can god be bother impersonal and compassionate?) gets sikhs to critically reflect on their religion just as much as I am reflecting on it. Having said that, if at the end of the day u come to a different conclusion then I have, and ur happy with urs as much as im happy with mines, by all means stick with it. Im not forcing anyone to become an atheist. I will admit to raising concerns but that is because I think there isnt a pathway for sikhs in the community to similarily raise concerns without the threat of ex communication or just generally being looked down upon. I also think sikhs tend to give very lazy answers to fellow sikhs. But if an atheist raises an objects, that gets sikhs thinking. Im doing this for everybody . In one of my very first threads here, a sikh commented "if only we had more young sikhs like you asking questions like these" however the longer ive been here that has come to been replaced by "why are u raising objects? just leave us be"

Just as a side note. My parents are probably the best parents I could have asked for. If I was to be "reborn" into a family and I had my choice of an atheist family I did not know or the current Sikh family I am from. I would choose to be reborn into this sikh family and just be the black sheep all over again. They've been more then tolerant of me and my views. (Just wanna throw that out there cuz some people accuse my parents of having did something to me to turn me into what I am lol).

 

[findingmyway]

I wouldn't say I have a bitterness towards sikhi that borders on spite (which is the notion I think most people on this site assume, that I am doing this out of spite either at my parents or my community). I have a slightly negative attitude towards most religions (although I assure you, i'm far more negative towards christianity and islam then I am sikhism, that might not mean much to you though). And this negativity isnt really any form of "hatred," its more of a "scorn" akin to how quantum scientists look at string theorists—they just don't get along lol. Quantum scientists dont think that String theorists are crazy... but rather, they think that what they believe in doesnt really amount to "good" science and it contains an element of "faith" that goes above and beyond what is acceptable for a science. Having said that, they acknowledge that in the end, string theory may come out being true. So likewise, I feel that there are somethings that are holding Sikhism back from being a truly universal religion as it was intended on being (the 5 K's, etc) some of which are of no fault of the religion, but rather the disciples (silly stories and inconsistant belief between one sikh and another). Even though I'm willing to acknowledge that in the end, sikhism may very well be right—I disagree with how it was put in place and how it is being practiced. So most of my objections are with the practical side of sikhi and not so much the theory.

Its not that i dont accept you for who you are. By all means, be a sikh, remain a sikh, etc. But the same way you think I have not critically examined sikhism is what I think of many sikhs. I mean, me and you probably agree on more aspects of sikhism then me and the average sikh. Even the whole "god is impersonal" thing. Ill agree with you about that. But I feel like asking a question like that one i asked before (how can god be bother impersonal and compassionate?) gets sikhs to critically reflect on their religion just as much as I am reflecting on it. Having said that, if at the end of the day u come to a different conclusion then I have, and ur happy with urs as much as im happy with mines, by all means stick with it. Im not forcing anyone to become an atheist. I will admit to raising concerns but that is because I think there isnt a pathway for sikhs in the community to similarily raise concerns without the threat of ex communication or just generally being looked down upon. I also think sikhs tend to give very lazy answers to fellow sikhs. But if an atheist raises an objects, that gets sikhs thinking. Im doing this for everybody . In one of my very first threads here, a sikh commented "if only we had more young sikhs like you asking questions like these" however the longer ive been here that has come to been replaced by "why are u raising objects? just leave us be"

Raising questions is good. However, for a while your tone become one of righteousness and you cannot possibly be right in your way of thinking rather than critical appraisal. All too often atheists have an attitude of moral superiority which is just as ugly in them as in religious people who have that attitude. In one thread the declaration was that you saw it as your personal mission to finish people's religious convictions which to me seems the same attitude as Christian missionaries. A couple of times you also completely disregarded some responses as they did not fit in well with what you think Sikhs believe. Genuine questions are very welcome. Recent posts from you have been more balanced and open minded, less judgemental and therefore more enjoyable for all and more welcome. We do have 1 major thing in common-we both think a lot of Sikhs have missed the point and we love to question!

Your concept of impersonal vs compassion is an interesting one. I guess my thinking about compassionate is 1) giving life and 2) the feeling of constancy and happiness that comes with achieving the state of union described in the Guru Granth Sahib ji. How life is used is then free will so that why it is not compassion in the human sense. All resources are available as seen in the array of life on the planet. Its humans that misuse them. I will admit that sometimes it is very difficult to see the compassion but taking the traditional meaning of compassion I think it is free will and compassion that is not compatible rather than Ik Oankar and compassion. I propose we have just put too narrow a definition on compassion so we can blame God for our actions. Hmmmmmmm :33:

Your example about string theory etc just proves that those who follow science as a religion as just as much fools!! I also disagree with your assessment about spirituality. What you describe are short term effects induced by an external agent. Spirituality is long term and comes from inside. I don't claim to be an expert as have a long long way to go but the 2 things are fundamentally different. Maybe you should define what spirituality means to you?