Ashamed To Be Sikh

[Seeker9]

This point cannot be stated enough. For some reason members of other faiths come to Sikh forums to put Sikhs on the defensive. Then there are Sikhs who come to Sikh forums to put their brothers and sister Sikhs on the defensive, using ill-conceived arguments.

Yet - If anyone of any other faith goes to other-faith forums with a similar agendas - how long is it tolerated? Sikhs are specifically directed to respect other faiths. How is this value played out by other religions?

When Sikhs do not respect other faiths they are chastised by other Sikhs. This does not mean that Sikhs should not react in a negative way if our beliefs are being trashed. Everything should be open to discussion. Everything however is not open to be debased.

Dear SPNAdmin Ji

Excellent points

I am looking at the poll at the start of this thread and see there is over 90% vote in favour of discussing the topic...to me that speaks volumes about this forum and the people who contribute here

I am actually quite proud of this result
rangesingh:

 

[Caspian]

What is unsettling? Why are the stories important? I stand by everything I have said. What is it you want from this or any other path? Why do you want to do it? Is it for relaxation? Is it for spiritual enlightenment? Is it for inner contentment and peace? Why?

These stories aren't important in the sense that we can both agree—they're largely unverifiable, meaningless and ridiculous. However the implications of these stories on young minds is important. I, like many other sikh childern at one point, was told these stories were true, and indeed the majority of sikh elders believe these stories to be true.

To put it in perspective, there is no immediate harm in believing in santa clause (even well through to adult hood); but is that belief any good either?

The fact that these stories have been and are used to inspire awe in young minds about the power of sikhi (even though they are not true) lead to a generation of uneducated gullible sikh minds. That is honestly, something every educated sikh should be ashamed about.

A hypothetical society that readily believes in santa claus well into their adulthood are seen as uneducated—stupid if you will. How is this any different from the majority of sikh elders who believe in these stories?

I need to understand the problem better before I can offer any assistance.

The problem, as stated above, is essentially the fact that these stories make the sikh community look stupid (and if the community looks stupid, then so does the religion. just like how the tea partiers seem racist, so their causes are tainted with the racist stigma). And it looks all the more stupid when there is no forum of discussion for these topics. A site like this helps in providing a forum, but the forum ought to be more public (as the original author mentioned, churches and mosques include these forums within the building itself). Sikhs need to be more mindful (instead of being closed-minded) of criticism as well. Actually address the criticism, its all to easy to reject something as "not important."

Fine. Don't believe them then. I will continue to be lazy and condescending and ask you to focus on spiritual matters and as is becoming of a Sikh, seek the wisdom contained within Sri Guru Granth Sahib

Heres another thing. I hear this often in these forums. "The wisdom of the guru granth." What wisdom are you referring to? I mean, yes, I agree, on many fronts the sikh religion was ahead of its time (equality between sexes, classes, races, religions, etc). But so what? These qualities are now common place, often times arising independantly from the guru granth sahib. Thats not to say that the guru granth sahib wasn't right in many regards—it certainly was. But it did not directly contribute to the equality many of us enjoy in the west—that arose independantly. SO what wisdom do you speak of? I find that much of the wisdom of the guru granth is just common sense today. Can you provide me some wisdom in the guru granth that is unheard of in our day to day lives? It may have been revolutionary for its time but thats really it. (And dont tell me to go read it, cuz i wont, i know enough about the guru granth sahib to know that i can read similar messages in any religious text or secular book on humanist causes).

I can understand what you are saying but I would have to say I disagree. I would suggest there is more to Sikhism than the need to establish irrefutable proof of the stories you refer to

Their certainly is more to sikhism then that. I'm jus lost for thoughts wen i try to think of whether or not their is more to sikhism then what hasnt already arose independantly from sikhism by now? Alot of people for example like to suggest that sikhism is a particulary scientific religion because it stated that their are countless stars, planets and even possibly life on those planets prior to the scientific consensus even reaching that point. However, thats still not science, you cant just make claims unverifiable, you have to verify them. Thats why even though the guru granth sahib may have been right—its "word" is not as good as the experiments done to provide evidence to the claim, that is far more powerful then any unsubstantiated claim.

It doesnt take a rocket scientist to preach a message of peace, universal brother hood and community service. Many of these messages have been preached before and if not, the latter revolutions that began the onset of these ideas in the west are far more influential and stronger. What good is a word/paragraph or sentance alluding to civil rights when the actual civil rights movement was much more impactful.

 

[Seeker9]

Ok here goes.....

The fact that these stories have been and are used to inspire awe in young minds about the power of sikhi (even though they are not true) lead to a generation of uneducated gullible sikh minds. That is honestly, something every educated sikh should be ashamed about.

If the stories parents tell their children is the only source they ever provide for SIkhi, then yes, yo do have a point. If that is the case, it is a real pity as any Gurdwara I have ever been to in different cities and countries has an educational programme for young children. So really, there is no reason for this to be the case

A hypothetical society that readily believes in santa claus well into their adulthood are seen as uneducated—stupid if you will. How is this any different from the majority of sikh elders who believe in these stories?

I would never call them stupid. They just have the utmost honour and respect for their religion. Again, as I have said twice already on this thread, I still don't see why this belief on their part should be a barrier to you

The problem, as stated above, is essentially the fact that these stories make the sikh community look stupid (and if the community looks stupid, then so does the religion

.

Bit of a sweeping generalisation there. Is the Christian community ridiculed for all the great stories in the Bible? The great plagues, the parting of the red sea, David & Goliath, the Tower of Babel etc etc? Answer - no they are not. So I will disagree with your point here

Sikhs need to be more mindful (instead of being closed-minded) of criticism as well. Actually address the criticism, its all to easy to reject something as "not important."

Interesting comparison with the "tolerant" Muslims who declare fatwahs on a world reknowned author who wrote a work of fiction never mind actually passed critical comment on an aspect of the faith......

You have expressed a viewpoint and I have mine. I consider it not important so said so. This is what it means to have a debate and discuss differing viewpoints. I think I have already said why I think it is not important. Can you tell me why it is important to you personally?? Not in general terms about the wider community but you personally?

Heres another thing. I hear this often in these forums. "The wisdom of the guru granth." What wisdom are you referring to?

Have you read it? Even in an english translation?

SO what wisdom do you speak of? I find that much of the wisdom of the guru granth is just common sense today. Can you provide me some wisdom in the guru granth that is unheard of in our day to day lives? It may have been revolutionary for its time but thats really it. (And dont tell me to go read it, cuz i wont, i know enough about the guru granth sahib to know that i can read similar messages in any religious text or secular book on humanist causes).

Ah right...I see...you haven't really read it but are speaking with some authority about it nonetheless. I am no intellectual but I have read the NT twice and the OT once, I have read large quantities of the Quran, the Rig Veda, the Tanakh, the Dhammapada and a number of other texts including Chinese philosophies. To me the Granth is different in a number of ways. Here's one seeing you asked...the concept of God. The Sikh concept is different from that of most established religions. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you know that already..if not may I humbly suggest you make greater effort to actually study that which you have been commenting on most freely.... Jap Ji Sahib is a good place to start....

Their certainly is more to sikhism then that. I'm jus lost for thoughts wen i try to think of whether or not their is more to sikhism then what hasnt already arose independantly from sikhism by now? Alot of people for example like to suggest that sikhism is a particulary scientific religion because it stated that their are countless stars, planets and even possibly life on those planets prior to the scientific consensus even reaching that point. However, thats still not science, you cant just make claims unverifiable, you have to verify them

.

Again...what "people" say is what people say. I don't care for people. The path of one's own spiritual enlightenment is not a shared experience. This is not something one does third hand through someone else. I still find it remarkable you get so hung up on "people". If Christians got hung up on "people" like the Catholic clergy for example, in the way you appear to be doing so with Sikhs, there would be mass desertions from the faith. You've just talked about stories and speculations...whereas the Priests I am referring to have caused great suffering

Thats why even though the guru granth sahib may have been right—its "word" is not as good as the experiments done to provide evidence to the claim, that is far more powerful then any unsubstantiated claim.

Sorry either my brain has just switched off or this statement is complete rubbish. Are you suggesting the need for scientific evidence for the existence of God or a God like force? If so then you best stick to atheism! Although ask an atheist to prove the non-existence of God in a similar fashion and they will struggle......

It doesnt take a rocket scientist to preach a message of peace, universal brother hood and community service. Many of these messages have been preached before and if not, the latter revolutions that began the onset of these ideas in the west are far more influential and stronger. What good is a word/paragraph or sentance alluding to civil rights when the actual civil rights movement was much more impactful

.[/QUOTE]

Yes actions speak louder than words. Incidentally, you're right... it doesn't take a rocket scientist...it does however require enlightened individuals...of which there have been many throughout time, including more recently...the Sikh Gurus

 

[Caspian]

Is the Christian community ridiculed for all the great stories in the Bible? The great plagues, the parting of the red sea, David & Goliath, the Tower of Babel etc etc? Answer - no they are not.

Oh wow, if anything, the christian religion is the most ridiculed religion in the media. Alot of shows from south park to the simpsons ridicule aspects of christianity on the regular.

To me the Granth is different in a number of ways. Here's one seeing you asked...the concept of God.

I have problems with the fundamental idea of god. I agree that the concept of god in sikhism is different then other religions. But the concept of god in general is something i have issues with. So thats a point where were both going to have to agree to disagree. Aside from the concept of god, is there anything else in the guru granth that hasnt already arose? And i have read the english translations of the jap ji sahib and parts of the guru granth. Im pretty well versed when it comes to the abrahemic religions as well as other eastern philosophies. I still find nothing of "great value" that i cannot find elsewhere in secular texts. Although i will say this, just as the guru granth was a compilation of selected works from different authors of different religions so should ur selection of texts be. Do not look to the guru granth as the pinnacle source of wisdom, there are many other sourced just as good, if not better.

Again...what "people" say is what people say. I don't care for people. The path of one's own spiritual enlightenment is not a shared experience. This is not something one does third hand through someone else. I still find it remarkable you get so hung up on "people". If Christians got hung up on "people" like the Catholic clergy for example, in the way you appear to be doing so with Sikhs, there would be mass desertions from the faith. You've just talked about stories and speculations...whereas the Priests I am referring to have caused great suffering

I feel like the fact that guru nanak got "hung up" on the ridiculous nature of hindo peoples is one of the main reasons your a sikh right now. Im not saying im guru nanak. But the fact that I care for about what people think, and what they choose to be, seems to me to be more in line with guru nanak's philosophies. Your philosophy is rather self-centered, dont mind me saying.

Are you suggesting the need for scientific evidence for the existence of God or a God like force? If so then you best stick to atheism! Although ask an atheist to prove the non-existence of God in a similar fashion and they will struggle......

Its not just science im open to, but rather any form of logic. Having said that, i think people have disproved the existance of god through science. Or atleast rendered his existance pointless.

Also, as we speak, the catholic clergy are worried about mass desertions from their religion. in quebec alone a sizeble portion of catholics recently converted to other forms of christianity due to the appalling acts of their preists. However, by and large, catholics dont really practice their faith to begin with . Thats why you can be an italian mafia don, latin drug king pin, spanish womaniser, or etc and still where a cross around ur neck

Yes actions speak louder than words. Incidentally, you're right... it doesn't take a rocket scientist...it does however require enlightened individuals...of which there have been many throughout time, including more recently...the Sikh Gurus

Even flawed individuals can come upon similar conclusions. Martin luther king, abraham lincoin, and mahatma ghandi to name a few. It doesnt take an enlightened individual to practice common sense either.

 

[gurbarakal]

Sikhism has 10 GURUS including GURU GRANTH SAHIB manifested IK OANKAR SATGUR PRASAD

Islam has 1 Allah and 1 Muhammad

Christianity has 1 Jehovah and 1 Christ

Judaism has 1 Yahwah and 1 Moses

because obviously Sikhism so large like the universe it will take time (yes macro-time) for the student to understand it whilst the others only serve 7 skies (in other words 1 solar system) - their ability to grasp the time-less one is limited to 1 heaven and 1 hell - which is only a single life period of a human.

Here's food for thought

The Yuga Cycles*
"Each yuga cycle is composed of 4 yugas. The first, the Satya-yuga, lasts 4800 years of the demigods. The second, the Treta-yuga, lasts 3600 years of the demigods. The third, the Dvapara-yuga, lasts 2400 years of the demigods. And the fourth, Kali-yuga, lasts 1200 years of the demigods . Since the demigod year is equivalent to 360 earth years, the lengths of the yugas in earth years are, acording to standard Vaishnava commentaries, 432,000 years for the Kali-yuga, 864,000 years for the Dvapara-yuga, 1,296,000 years for the Treta-yuga, and 1,728,000 years for the Satya-yuga.
"This gives a total of 4,320,000 years for the entire yuga cycle. One thousand of such cycles, lasting 4,320,000 years, comprises one day of Brahma, the demigod who governs this universe. A day of Brahma is also called a kalpa. Each of Brahma's nights lasts a similar period of time. Life is only manifest on earth during the day of Brahma. With the onset of Brahma's night, the entire universe is devastated and plunged into darkness. When another day of Brahma begins, life again becomes manifest.
"Each day of Brahma is divided into 14 manvantara periods, each one lasting 71 yuga cycles. Preceding the first and following each manvantara period is a juncture (sandhya) the length of a Satya-yuga (1,728,000 years). Typically, each manvantara period ends with a partial devastation. According to Puranic accounts, we are now in the twenty-eighth yuga cycle of the seventh manvantara period of the present day of Brahma."

 

[Seeker9]

Oh wow, if anything, the christian religion is the most ridiculed religion in the media. Alot of shows from south park to the simpsons ridicule aspects of christianity on the regular.

Nah...not accepting the media argument. Having said that...I was referring to stories like you were...I tend to see fun made of Christian figures and Christian attitudes but not the stories....the point was about the stories seeing you raised this concern for Sikhism

I have problems with the fundamental idea of god. I agree that the concept of god in sikhism is different then other religions. But the concept of god in general is something i have issues with. So thats a point where were both going to have to agree to disagree.

Well that's progress! I believe atheists have been entertained on this forum before so happy to have a debate about atheism itself

Aside from the concept of god, is there anything else in the guru granth that hasnt already arose? And i have read the english translations of the jap ji sahib and parts of the guru granth. Im pretty well versed when it comes to the abrahemic religions as well as other eastern philosophies. I still find nothing of "great value" that i cannot find elsewhere in secular texts.

In that case, there isn't much else I can offer you then as you have already made your decision

Although i will say this, just as the guru granth was a compilation of selected works from different authors of different religions so should ur selection of texts be. Do not look to the guru granth as the pinnacle source of wisdom, there are many other sourced just as good, if not better.

I was not aware the authorship of SGGSJ was anywhere near as diverse as you suggest...you need to expand on this statement. I am also happy with the each to their own concept so long as they don't try to force themselves upon others. So let the Christians revere their Bible and the Muslims their Quran etc. I am where I am and they are where they are. But seeing you mentioned it...perhaps you can give us some real examples of what you consider to be superior scripture and why

I feel like the fact that guru nanak got "hung up" on the ridiculous nature of hindo peoples is one of the main reasons your a sikh right now.

Actually I'm not a Sikh...as the name suggests..I am just a seeker and a wannabee Sikh!

Im not saying im guru nanak. But the fact that I care for about what people think, and what they choose to be, seems to me to be more in line with guru nanak's philosophies. Your philosophy is rather self-centered, dont mind me saying.

Don't mind at all....what did I say that was self-centred???

Its not just science im open to, but rather any form of logic. Having said that, i think people have disproved the existance of god through science. Or atleast rendered his existance pointless.

Oh dear...I would disagree with that and suggest you read up more on Quantum physics....Science does not have ALL the answers at all but I am not going to bore folk with a lot of theory on this thread, when it's so easy to Google it yourself... that made me laugh though.....

Even flawed individuals can come upon similar conclusions. Martin luther king, abraham lincoin, and mahatma ghandi to name a few. It doesnt take an enlightened individual to practice common sense either.

This made me laugh as well! Hats off to you though for suggesting that any teaching that the purpose of life is to return to the Original Source is plain commonsense...

rangesingh:

 

[Caspian]

This made me laugh as well! Hats off to you though for suggesting that any teaching that the purpose of life is to return to the Original Source is plain commonsense...

No, sry , let me rephrase, the practical aspects of sikhism are common sense—the rest (like what you just mentioned) is unverifiable scientifically or logically so its pointless. Eitherwhich way, u can replace "to the original source" with "heaven" or "reaching nirvana" its the same basic concept. Nothing unique about it.

 

[spnadmin]

Moderation question: Is there a concept of nirvana in Sikhism? The answer can make a difference insofar as understanding what is meant by liberation in Sikhism versus Buddhism.

More than a matter of semantics, the answer may also shed light on what is meant by the "practical aspects of Sikhi."

 

[findingmyway]

Caspian Ji,
From your writing seems to me that you are too hung up on what people think. You are a follower rather than a thinker. Right now religion is not fashionable so you refuse to follow. If you were born in the Guru's time you probably would be a follower as that is what everyone around you would be doing. Sorry if I'm wrong, but that is my observation from reading your writings across the forum. By worrying too much about outsiders opinions you are hampering your own spiritual growth only, not affecting anyone else. By caring so much about what others will think if you become religious, you are closing your mind. That is fine if it works for you but it is not fine to impose that on others by looking for discrepancies. Bear with me as I get some more thoughts down based on your answers. You seem to love to try and find discrepancies! Shows your insecurity but thats ok as it gets me thinking so helps me learn too

I have problems with the fundamental idea of god. I agree that the concept of god in sikhism is different then other religions. But the concept of god in general is something i have issues with. So thats a point where were both going to have to agree to disagree. Aside from the concept of god, is there anything else in the guru granth that hasnt already arose? And i have read the english translations of the jap ji sahib and parts of the guru granth. Im pretty well versed when it comes to the abrahemic religions as well as other eastern philosophies. I still find nothing of "great value" that i cannot find elsewhere in secular texts. Although i will say this, just as the guru granth was a compilation of selected works from different authors of different religions so should ur selection of texts be.

you say you are an atheist yet you don't believe in god-surely that makes you agnostic? at the end you talk about returning to the source/nirvana whatever which means you must believe in god. please make up your mind!! you can't have it both ways at once.

As for the contents of the Guru Granth Sahib Ji, yes it teaches you to be a good person, yes it teaches you to stand up for others, yes it teaches God loves you which other texts do too. However, the other texts don't give you the strength of character to follow these teachings through all your life. No other religion has had people die for others right for freedom. They all teach their way is the right way. The Guru Granth Sahib teaches that we can all coexist. Which other philosophy teaches you to stand up for others even if they are of a different faith? That is one of the biggest differences. There is absolutely no hate. Another big difference, is that Sikhi teaches constancy in emotion so you do not get swayed in your actions. We are taught to look at birth and death in a similar way and only by being connected with Ik Oankar will we remain constantly happy and constantly focussed no matter how bad things get around us. No other philosophy does this effectively (possibly Buddhism but they require you to hide away whereas in Sikhi you achieve this in the real world). Worldly pleasures are short lived and constantly changing. Therefore spiritual happinness is more fulfilling.

Do not look to the guru granth as the pinnacle source of wisdom, there are many other sourced just as good, if not better.

Really? Please do share which sources are better? I would love to know. You must qualify such statements. I'm very intrigued!

I feel like the fact that guru nanak got "hung up" on the ridiculous nature of hindo peoples is one of the main reasons your a sikh right now. Im not saying im guru nanak. But the fact that I care for about what people think, and what they choose to be, seems to me to be more in line with guru nanak's philosophies. Your philosophy is rather self-centered, dont mind me saying.

You twisted that nicely!! Guru Nanak Dev Ji told Hindu's to be good Hindu's and Muslim's to be good Muslim's. He was not hung up on their 'ridiculous nature' but on the way the common man was being manipulated by those at the top. He told people to think about their actions rather than have blind faith. However, he did not undermine the Hindu faith or tell people to stop following. Many Sikhs died for the sake of the Hindu faith. Guru Nanak encouraged introspection, not judging others.

Its not just science im open to, but rather any form of logic. Having said that, i think people have disproved the existance of god through science. Or atleast rendered his existance pointless.

Incorrect or show me sources to back this up. Religion has been neither able to prove or disprove God. There are many scientists who are also religious (including myself) and others who are not. Stop mixing the 2 as they are not mutually exclusive.

Even flawed individuals can come upon similar conclusions. Martin luther king, abraham lincoin, and mahatma ghandi to name a few. It doesnt take an enlightened individual to practice common sense either.

Their teachings were very different to Naankian philosophy so lets keep them separate and discuss their merits or otherwise elsewhere. They were not focussed on spirituality as well as humanity and that is what makes Sikhi unique-the 2 go hand in hand while living in the real world icecreamkaur

 

[Seeker9]

No, sry , let me rephrase, the practical aspects of sikhism are common sense—the rest (like what you just mentioned) is unverifiable scientifically or logically so its pointless. Eitherwhich way, u can replace "to the original source" with "heaven" or "reaching nirvana" its the same basic concept. Nothing unique about it.

I really wouldn't rely too much on just science if I were you....according to fundamental principles of aerodynamics a Bumble Bee shouldn't be able to fly......yet it does

As for the standard atheist argument about no scientific proof for the existence of God or the need for a God, Atheists are also incapable of providing similar scientific proof that God does not exist...so I would suggest that view is logically pointless as well

 

[findingmyway]

The Yuga Cycles*
"Each yuga cycle is composed of 4 yugas. The first, the Satya-yuga, lasts 4800 years of the demigods. The second, the Treta-yuga, lasts 3600 years of the demigods. The third, the Dvapara-yuga, lasts 2400 years of the demigods. And the fourth, Kali-yuga, lasts 1200 years of the demigods . Since the demigod year is equivalent to 360 earth years, the lengths of the yugas in earth years are, acording to standard Vaishnava commentaries, 432,000 years for the Kali-yuga, 864,000 years for the Dvapara-yuga, 1,296,000 years for the Treta-yuga, and 1,728,000 years for the Satya-yuga.
"This gives a total of 4,320,000 years for the entire yuga cycle. One thousand of such cycles, lasting 4,320,000 years, comprises one day of Brahma, the demigod who governs this universe. A day of Brahma is also called a kalpa. Each of Brahma's nights lasts a similar period of time. Life is only manifest on earth during the day of Brahma. With the onset of Brahma's night, the entire universe is devastated and plunged into darkness. When another day of Brahma begins, life again becomes manifest.
"Each day of Brahma is divided into 14 manvantara periods, each one lasting 71 yuga cycles. Preceding the first and following each manvantara period is a juncture (sandhya) the length of a Satya-yuga (1,728,000 years). Typically, each manvantara period ends with a partial devastation. According to Puranic accounts, we are now in the twenty-eighth yuga cycle of the seventh manvantara period of the present day of Brahma."

This is not a Sikh concept. Please see
http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/new-to-sikhism/32958-kalyug.html

As for your question, spnadmin, my understanding of liberation is that it is unique in Sikhi as it refers to state of mind while alive whereas all other philosophies relate to after death. Therefore we get the fruits of our labour while living cheerleader

 

[Seeker9]

As for your question, spnadmin, my understanding of liberation is that it is unique in Sikhi as it refers to state of mind while alive whereas all other philosophies relate to after death. Therefore we get the fruits of our labour while living cheerleader

[/QUOTE]

Hmmnn...Buddha achieved enlightenment under the banyan tree whilst alive didn't he??

 

[Caspian]

From your writing seems to me that you are too hung up on what people think. You are a follower rather than a thinker. Right now religion is not fashionable so you refuse to follow. If you were born in the Guru's time you probably would be a follower as that is what everyone around you would be doing. Sorry if I'm wrong, but that is my observation from reading your writings across the forum.

on the contrary, ive been raising issues like these with my parents and community from the age of 6. It certainly wasn't fashionable for a 6 year old to be so questionative and if you were right i simply would have followed what my parents and community told me was true (even thought it didnt jive with my internal sense of truth and falsity). Having said that, if i was there at the guru's time i would defintly be more prone to believe in sikhism because it simple was the best available source of knowledge AT THE TIME. time change, science and logic have vastly improved and overtaken any religions positions as a "source of wisdom." So i'm not a follower as you have suggested, indeed the large majority of the world is religious so i tend to see religious people as being followers, not atheists. Most atheists come to this realisation on their own.

you say you are an atheist yet you don't believe in god-surely that makes you agnostic? at the end you talk about returning to the source/nirvana whatever which means you must believe in god. please make up your mind!! you can't have it both ways at once.

You've misunderstoof alot of what I've said. My disbelief in god makes me atheist—not agnostic. Agnostics simply dont care about the question of gods existence, or simply say "you cannot prove or disprove his existence"—simply put, agnostics dont know or care if god exists. I on the other hand strongly believe god doesnt exist, and if he does, he is largely pointless. Thats the difference between atheism and agnosticism in laymens terms. I talk about nirvana and heaven at the end because im equating those ideas to the sikh idea of "returning to the creator" or w/e it is he suggested. I dont actually believe in heaven or nirvana either. I do believe in spirituality but only in a psychological sense in that it is a state of mind. For example, epilectics (people who have a history of having seizures) routinely have spiritual experiences due to their epilepsy—is that the grace of god? You can have spiritual experiences by fasting (islam) through sweat lodges (native americans) or taking drugs (everyone else lol).

As for the contents of the Guru Granth Sahib Ji, yes it teaches you to be a good person, yes it teaches you to stand up for others, yes it teaches God loves you which other texts do too. However, the other texts don't give you the strength of character to follow these teachings through all your life. No other religion has had people die for others right for freedom. They all teach their way is the right way. The Guru Granth Sahib teaches that we can all coexist. Which other philosophy teaches you to stand up for others even if they are of a different faith? That is one of the biggest differences.

Simple answer: Atheistic/humanistic philosophies advocate the same thing as the sikh philosophies you pointed out. You dont need to be a religious person to advocate those philosophies. Although i am an atheist I would die for your right to freedom of expression/religion/and what have you. And thats the truth—youll find that common among many atheists. Indeed, abraham lincoiln fought a war over the issue of slavery—that sounds so very familiar to the fights sikhs waged in defence of other minorities. Abraham lincoin was also an atheist.

There is absolutely no hate. Another big difference, is that Sikhi teaches constancy in emotion so you do not get swayed in your actions. We are taught to look at birth and death in a similar way and only by being connected with Ik Oankar will we remain constantly happy and constantly focussed no matter how bad things get around us. No other philosophy does this effectively (possibly Buddhism but they require you to hide away whereas in Sikhi you achieve this in the real world). Worldly pleasures are short lived and constantly changing. Therefore spiritual happinness is more fulfilling.

You should really look into some humanistic philosophies. You dont need a god to be as happy you think you are.

Really? Please do share which sources are better? I would love to know. You must qualify such statements. I'm very intrigued!

Richard Dawkins, Bertrand Russel, George Carlin (my fav comedian), Christopher Hitchens, Noam Chomsky. But as i have mentioned before, even the reasonings of abraham lincoln or martin luther king or other men of faith (including the guru granth) make sense at certain points. Its jus as a sole source of "wisdom" or information, they are very poor.

You twisted that nicely!!

Thanks

Guru Nanak Dev Ji told Hindu's to be good Hindu's and Muslim's to be good Muslim's. He was not hung up on their 'ridiculous nature' but on the way the common man was being manipulated by those at the top. He told people to think about their actions rather than have blind faith. However, he did not undermine the Hindu faith or tell people to stop following. Many Sikhs died for the sake of the Hindu faith. Guru Nanak encouraged introspection, not judging others.

And there in lies a problem for sikhs. If Guru Nanak dev ji was right and all one has to do was essentially be a good human being. (a good hindu or a good muslim) of what use is it to be sikh? Let alone hindu or muslim or any other religion. He did undermine their traditions by the way, he rejected the thread ceremony and he pointed his feet towards mecca when we as sikhs cannot reject the amrit ceremony and do not point our feet towards the guru granth sahib. Vast inconsistancies

Incorrect or show me sources to back this up. Religion has been neither able to prove or disprove God. There are many scientists who are also religious (including myself) and others who are not. Stop mixing the 2 as they are not mutually exclusive.

I dealt with the proof in an earlier post somewhere in the hard talk section of this site

t

heir teachings were very different to Naankian philosophy so lets keep them separate and discuss their merits or otherwise elsewhere. They were not focussed on spirituality as well as humanity and that is what makes Sikhi unique-the 2 go hand in hand while living in the real world

Again I beg to differ. Parts of their philosophy were very similar to sikh philosophies. It seems so very obvious that martin luther kings message was one that pretained to all humanity. Spirituality on the other hand, as i said above, is just a state of mind that one can acheive without being religious.

 

[Seeker9]

You've misunderstoof alot of what I've said. My disbelief in god makes me atheist—not agnostic. Agnostics simply dont care about the question of gods existence, or simply say "you cannot prove or disprove his existence"—simply put, agnostics dont know or care if god exists.

You should update your SPN profile then which I have just visited and where you have labelled yourself as Agnostic....is this a recent revelation for you or were you just confused????
winkingmunda

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Caspian ji,

Guru Fateh.

Interesting discussions going on here that is what Sikhi is all about.

I have a question for you so I can understand where you are coming from.

What is God for you and is the concept of God in other religions same as of Ik Ong Kaar in Sikhi? If yes or no, can you please elaborate it from your view point?

Thanks & regards

Tejwant Singh

 

[Caspian]

You should update your SPN profile then which I have just visited and where you have labelled yourself as Agnostic....is this a recent revelation for you or were you just confused????

Updated. I think it was carelesness on my part when i made this account. I didnt think anyone would ever look at my profile thnx for the heads up. But rest assured, I am an atheist.

Having said that, there are no quarrels with the rest of my post?

 

[Seeker9]

Updated. I think it was carelesness on my part when i made this account. I didnt think anyone would ever look at my profile thnx for the heads up. But rest assured, I am an atheist.

Having said that, there are no quarrels with the rest of my post?

I will allow Findingmyway Ji the courtesy of responding to that one first

Good healthy discussion...enjoying the distraction...far more interesting than the Management theory I'm having to study for a forthcoming exam!

 

[findingmyway]

Hmmnn...Buddha achieved enlightenment under the banyan tree whilst alive didn't he??
[/QUOTE]

thanks for the clarification. i'll leave this point for someone else in that case. caspian, what is your understanding of liberation? how does this fit in with your views?

 

[Caspian]

Good healthy discussion...enjoying the distraction...far more interesting than the Management theory I'm having to study for a forthcoming exam!

Studying for cognitive psychology right now. Ugh, im going to fail the quiz because of this lol—oh well, good conversation is worth it.

 

[Caspian]

<!-- google_ad_section_start -->Hmmnn...Buddha achieved enlightenment under the banyan tree whilst alive didn't he??

Yes, he did. I dont exactly know what qualifies as enlightenment. Scientifically speaking, buddhist monks are significantly happier on average then the rest of the population around the world. They are also a godless religion, (as is jainism i think as some one else mentioned). Its interesting to me that members of sikhism would like to more closely associate with godless religions like buddhism and jainism as opposed to religions like christianity, hinduism and islam. It seems to me that this suggests that even sikhs hold the practical applications of their religion in higher regard then the actual concept of god. Otherwise surely, a religion like buddhism or jainism would seem unappealing. Hmmm i would like to talk about this more if anyone wants to pick it up with me?

thanks for the clarification. i'll leave this point for someone else in that case. caspian, what is your understanding of liberation? how does this fit in with your views?

Liberation in what sense? Liberation in the sense of how the birth control pill is considered to have liberated the modern women. Or how a form of "self-mental-slavery" keep african-americans from truly liberating. Explain further