Guru Nanak And Muhammad | Sikh Philosophy Network
  • Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
    Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
    Sign up Log in

Guru Nanak And Muhammad

Abneet

SPNer
Apr 8, 2013
281
312
I was just wondering, why did Guru Nanak mention Prophet Muhammad and say he was one of God's beloved prophets when he saw described afterlife, but Prophet Muhammad said he was the last of the prophets every to set on Earth. So why would Guru Nanak even mention him even when Muhammad would reject Guru Nanak as a prophet as God.
 

Luckysingh

Writer
SPNer
Dec 4, 2011
1,633
2,748
Vancouver
I was just wondering, why did Guru Nanak mention Prophet Muhammad and say he was one of God's beloved prophets when he saw described afterlife, but Prophet Muhammad said he was the last of the prophets every to set on Earth. So why would Guru Nanak even mention him even when Muhammad would reject Guru Nanak as a prophet as God.
I haven't hear this before !!
What was your source of information for this or was it a sakhi ??
Guru Nanakji never described afterlife or what it looked like as far as I know. :interestedsingh:
 

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)
SPNer
Jun 17, 2004
14,500
19,181
The OP is asking a logical question. However I have had concerns since earlier today about the topic. Where is it headed?

Yes I am planning to delete the entire thread if I cannot make sense of it by day's end. The threads that "explore" connections between Sikh Gurus and Muslim personalities in the early history of Sikhi have to be referenced to something dependable. There is too too too much fantasy out there on the Internet.
 

techsingh

SPNer
Jul 15, 2012
107
69
Midwest, USA
ਬਹੁ ਵਾਟੀ ਜਗਿ ਚਲੀਆ ਤਬ ਹੀ ਭਏ ਮੁਹੰਮਦਿ ਯਾਰਾ.

what would be the correct translation for this. many people have translated it to be mohammed the friend of god.

Then bhai shaib goes on to say

ਮਾਰਨਿ ਗਊ ਗਰੀਬ ਨੋ ਧਰਤੀ ਉਪਰਿ ਪਾਪੁ ਬਿਥਾਰਾ।

which is translated into "Less powerful were killed and thus the earth became replete with sin."




so i dont' know what my sahib means by "yaar" but dosent seem like he meant friend.


But than in zafernama is says the mugals were not true muslims. which means trues muslims would have never done those things. But than that would go against what bhai shaib is saying.

ਕਾਫਰ ਮੁਲਹਦ ਇਰਮਨੀ ਰੂਮੀ ਜੰਗੀ ਦੁਸਮਣਿ ਦਾਰਾ
which is translated into "Armenians and Rumis were declared apostates (Kafirs) and they were decimated in the Battle fields."


is zafernama authentic writhing of Guru Gobind Singh ji.
 

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)
SPNer
Jun 17, 2004
14,500
19,181
ਬਹੁ ਵਾਟੀ ਜਗਿ ਚਲੀਆ ਤਬ ਹੀ ਭਏ ਮੁਹੰਮਦਿ ਯਾਰਾ.

what would be the correct translation for this. many people have translated it to be mohammed the friend of god.

Then bhai shaib goes on to say

ਮਾਰਨਿ ਗਊ ਗਰੀਬ ਨੋ ਧਰਤੀ ਉਪਰਿ ਪਾਪੁ ਬਿਥਾਰਾ।

which is translated into "Less powerful were killed and thus the earth became replete with sin."




so i dont' know what my sahib means by "yaar" but dosent seem like he meant friend.


But than in zafernama is says the mugals were not true muslims. which means trues muslims would have never done those things. But than that would go against what bhai shaib is saying.

ਕਾਫਰ ਮੁਲਹਦ ਇਰਮਨੀ ਰੂਮੀ ਜੰਗੀ ਦੁਸਮਣਿ ਦਾਰਾ
which is translated into "Armenians and Rumis were declared apostates (Kafirs) and they were decimated in the Battle fields."


is zafernama authentic writhing of Guru Gobind Singh ji.
This is what worries me. Zafarnama is a way off topic from the OP issue related to Guru Nanak. The historical context is very different from the time of Guru Nanak and that of Guru Gobind Singh. Comparisons and contrasts just don't make any sense if the OP is asking about Mohammed as a Prophet of God, and about the Muslim ideas of an afterlife. There is more to both issues than concluding that Mohammed must have been a "great guy." Guru Gobind Singh is addressing a moral and a political problem, not a theological problem. And we cannot source the supposed statement of Guru Nanak; and therefore do not know what we are talking about.

The thread is on its way to deletion.
 
Last edited:

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)
SPNer
Jun 17, 2004
14,500
19,181
Yes techsingh ji

It is fine to start a new thread about Zafarnameh! No problem with that.
 

Luckysingh

Writer
SPNer
Dec 4, 2011
1,633
2,748
Vancouver
sat sri akaal

looking at the age of thread starter , i feel its not good to delete the thread as such questions are tactics are used by some muslims to brainwash kids .
I agree wholeheartedly.
There are lots of false myths and tactics that go around.
I have often heard the Guru Nanak Ji held high regards for muslims and went to Mecca for the pilgrimage !!!

There is no doubt that Guru Nanak Ji held high regards for Kabirji. A lot of pure gurmat was within Kabirji and his writings.
However, although a muslim, he was adopted and taught in a different hindu environment.
Some of the muslims take this factor about Kabirji, who was older than Nanakji from what I gather, that he was a huge influence on Guru Nanak ji.
The claim seems to be that Guru Nanak ji was a fan of the enlightened Kabirji and preached according to his gurmat!!!
This little 'tactic' of brainwashing then goes further to insist that the founder of the Sikh religion was in fact searching islam.

With regards to the Mecca story, we have reasons that Guruji himself went for the pilgrimage and that Mardana being a muslim went as well.
We know the lesson that Guruji taught about God residing everywhere and not just in the west at the kabbah. But they argue that a 'non-muslim' is not allowed on the grounds whatsoever and that Guruji was carrying the Koran with him.
Therefore, they claim that Guruji would NOT have been allowed if it was clear that he was non-muslim!

I'm not to sure about these, but my personal argument here would be that Guruji carried his pothi and it was wrapped in a protective decorative cloth. This could have been mistaken for the Koran by the 'watchers'.
Then we know that Guruji wore a seli-topi as they call it, which is like Islamic head wear, so there is no doubt that he would have been mistaken for an Islamic priest of some sort with this attire and look.

Some of these claims are bases for other threads, but Harmanpreet made a very good point about the tactics used on the young and I know personally how some youth have been affected by this recently.
 

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)
SPNer
Jun 17, 2004
14,500
19,181
Please read from another thread on the subject of Guru Nanak in Mecca

How could Guru Nanak visit Mecca if he wasn't a Muslim?

The assertion that non-Muslims cannot infiltrate Mecca is false. The city of Mecca was not developed during the time of the Guru. It was a vast desert land and people could commute freely unlike now. Only until recently Saudi Arabia has become rich with the oil money and developed as a result.

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji was neither the first nor the last non-Muslim to visit or infiltrate Mecca. The most famous incident of a non-Muslim visiting Mecca was the visit by the British explorer Sir Richard Burton in 1853. Burton disguised himself as an Afghani Muslim to visit and write Personal Narrative of a Pilgrimage to Al Madinah and Mecca. Therefore, how can it be impossible for Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, who is ‘Akaal Roop’, the embodiment of the Divine Light of God, to visit Mecca? The who land belongs to God, so how can the Living Image of God, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji be stopped traveling anywhere in the world. God or God’s power cannot be limited.

Guru sahib dressed as a Fakeer, holy man, which meant a chola of khuddar (rough low grade material) and a pair of wooden sandals with his companion Baba Mardana Ji, who was from a Muslim background, infiltrated the city of Mecca.

ਬਾਬਾ ਫਿਰ ਮੱਕੇ ਗਯਾ ਨੀਲ ਬਸਤ੍ਰ ਧਾਰੇ ਬਨਵਾਰੀ ॥
ਆਸਾ ਹੱਥ ਕਿਤਾਬ ਕੱਛ ਕੂਜਾ ਬਾਂਗ ਮੁਸੱਲਾ ਧਾਰੀ ॥
“Donning blue attire then Baba Nanak went to Mecca. He held staff in his hand, pressed a book under his arm, caught hold of a metal pot and mattress.”
(Vaar 1, Pauree 32 – Bhai Gurdaas Ji)


Dress in Sikhi and in Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s own words, carries no divinity or spiritual significance. He dressed as a Fakeer so as not to be thought a novice and thus excluded from religious discussions of the Muslims Fakeers of the time. Moreover wearing a Fakeer’s dress does not necessarily make one Muslim.

Only in more recent history has the security of Mecca and Medina been stepped up. However, even then non-Muslims are allowed to enter the city of Mecca as long as they have business there. In the past, several non-Muslims journalists and camera crew have been allowed in to create documentaries, as well as VIPs. For example, Mecca is currently in redevelopment; project under taken by architecture firm based in North America. Non-Muslim Architects ands engineers have been in Mecca and will continue until 2012. However that should not be confused with the existing rule in place that forbids non-Muslims from entering the area as others mentioned.

Muslims seeking to twist history and reality for their own agenda and world-view have totally manipulated the reason why Guru Nanak Sahib Ji visited Mecca. Muslims go to Mecca to pay their homage and worship God (this pilgrimage is called Hajj in the Islamic faith), but this was not the purpose of the Guru to go there. Guru Sahib says:


ਹਜ ਕਾਬੈ ਜਾਉ ਨ ਤੀਰਥ ਪੂਜਾ ॥ ਏਕੋ ਸੇਵੀ ਅਵਰੁ ਨ ਦੂਜਾ ॥੨॥
ਪੂਜਾ ਕਰਉ ਨ ਨਿਵਾਜ ਗੁਜਾਰਉ ॥ ਏਕ ਨਿਰੰਕਾਰ ਲੇ ਰਿਦੈ ਨਮਸਕਾਰਉ ॥੩॥
"I do not make pilgrimages to Mecca, nor do I worship at Hindu sacred shrines. I serve the One Lord, and not any other. ||2|| I do not perform Hindu worship services, nor do I offer the Muslim prayers. I have taken the One Formless Lord into my heart; I humbly worship Him there. ||3||”
(Ang 1136)

This shows that Guru Sahib did not visit Mecca to worship Allah. Instead, He went for different reasons. Muslims believe that God is in the west and only likes Muslims. Guru Sahib visited Mecca to clear their doubts and to show them the right path. He went to preach oneness of God who does not reside only in the west. Guru Sahib said there are infinite heavens, hells and solar systems. There is no end to God or His creation.


Guru Nanak Sahib Ji is recorded to have visited Mecca not the Kaa’ba. The one thing clear from the historical evidence is that he visited Mecca with his companion, Baba Mardana Ji, who was from a Muslim background. They stayed somewhere probably in a nearby village or town. Pilgrims do not stay in the Kaa’ba. They stay outside the holy shrine area in villages, towns or tents. It is also clear from the evidence that Guru Sahib is recorded as having slept with his feet ‘towards’ the Kaa’ba. If Guru Sahib were sleeping inside or nearby the Kaa’ba (which is not possible when millions visit it), there would not have been the account that we read today.

There is no mention anywhere that he observed ihram, did twaf, ran between Safwa and Marwa or sacrificed an animal. For pilgrimage all these rituals are absolutely essential. As for saying Namaz, there is no evidence that he followed an Imam or uttered Quranic verses anywhere. Furthermore, Guru Sahib no where wrote La Allah Illilah Mohammed Rasul Allah. If one still thinks that Guru Nanak Sahib Ji was a Muslim, then would you accept such pretenders as Muslims who conceal their faith? Guru Sahib never stated that he was a Muslim, instead he did the opposite.
Link http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-sikhi-sikhism/17921-how-could-guru-nanak-visit-mecca-10.html#post62275 Please note that the source link on Sikhism101 has expired. More information about Guru Nanak's visit can be found in the histories of both Joseph Cunningham and Max Macauliffe.


Saudi Arabia did not exist as an independent country until the 20th Century.
Here my point is that Guru Nanak did not enter Mecca in "disguise." Bhai Gurdas says he "donning the blue attire" he went to Mecca. There was no need to slip under the radar to visit as Mecca was an open place at that time; there would be no need for passports or visa stamps as Saudi was not a country. Most of the Arab world as a matter of fact was considered a continuous geographical expanse open to travel for trade and intellectual exchange.

The rest of the quoted material points out that Guru Nanak was participating in an exchange of ideas. He was not acting as a pilgrim but as a teacher.
 
Last edited:

Abneet

SPNer
Apr 8, 2013
281
312
Sorry brothers, I haven't checked my thread in awhile and sorry if I made you all I think I was a Muslim. But i came to ask this question to you guys after I passed this site
http://www.info-sikh.com/PageKnow17.html

This site wasn't the one that mentioned Prophet Muhammad specifically, but I'm trying to figure out when Guru Nanak described Giaan Khand where goddesses, angels, and prophets reside did he mention any one specifically?
 
Last edited:

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)
SPNer
Jun 17, 2004
14,500
19,181
Sorry brothers, I haven't checked my thread in awhile and sorry if I made you all I think I was a Muslim. But i came to ask this question to you guys after I passed this site
http://www.info-sikh.com/PageKnow17.html

This site wasn't the one that mentioned Prophet Muhammad specifically, but I'm trying to figure out when Guru Nanak described Giaan Khand where goddesses, angels, and prophets reside did he mention any one specifically?
Abneet ji

The info-sikh site is known to have a number of problems with accuracy and bias.

To answer your question it is important to take sections of SGGS under study in a very serious way. Khands, goddesses, angels and prophets are all mentioned. However, their meaning and relevance needs to be understood by giaam of the guru's bani itself.

At this moment I cannot take the tour with you. You should search for threads here at SPN that have discussed ideas of goddesses, angels and prophets in Sikhism at length That should help you out.
 

Jaswinderpal

SPNer
Feb 14, 2016
6
0
33
Waheguru ji ka khalsa waheguru ji ki fateh. I am kinda disturbed by going through the quote of bhai sahib Gurdas ji. Wherein he has written Mohamd Yaara . But the people who are translating it have got it wrong . This vaar 1 pauraee 20 where Bhai sahib says mohammad and his yaar ( four companions) who destroyed the dharam and spread useless rituals like fasting hajj and namaz.
 

Jaswinderpal

SPNer
Feb 14, 2016
6
0
33
This is not zafar
ਬਹੁ ਵਾਟੀ ਜਗਿ ਚਲੀਆ ਤਬ ਹੀ ਭਏ ਮੁਹੰਮਦਿ ਯਾਰਾ.

what would be the correct translation for this. many people have translated it to be mohammed the friend of god.

Then bhai shaib goes on to say

ਮਾਰਨਿ ਗਊ ਗਰੀਬ ਨੋ ਧਰਤੀ ਉਪਰਿ ਪਾਪੁ ਬਿਥਾਰਾ।

which is translated into "Less powerful were killed and thus the earth became replete with sin."




so i dont' know what my sahib means by "yaar" but dosent seem like he meant friend.


But than in zafernama is says the mugals were not true muslims. which means trues muslims would have never done those things. But than that would go against what bhai shaib is saying.

ਕਾਫਰ ਮੁਲਹਦ ਇਰਮਨੀ ਰੂਮੀ ਜੰਗੀ ਦੁਸਮਣਿ ਦਾਰਾ
which is translated into "Armenians and Rumis were declared apostates (Kafirs) and they were decimated in the Battle fields."


is zafernama authentic writhing of Guru Gobind Singh ji.
this is not zafarnama veerji. This is vaar 1 pauraee 20 of bhai gurdas ji . Reading few lines we cannot comprehend meaning. Mohamad yaar means mohammad and his companion ( four companion). Spread ritual which dont lead any where .
 

Jaswinderpal

SPNer
Feb 14, 2016
6
0
33
This is not zafar

this is not zafarnama veerji. This is vaar 1 pauraee 20 of bhai gurdas ji . Reading few lines we cannot comprehend meaning. Mohamad yaar means mohammad and his companion ( four companion). Spread ritual which dont lead any where .
ਬਹੁ ਵਾਟੀ ਜਗਿ ਚਲੀਆ ਤਬ ਹੀ ਭਏ ਮੁਹੰਮਦਿ ਯਾਰਾ.

what would be the correct translation for this. many people have translated it to be mohammed the friend of god.

Then bhai shaib goes on to say

ਮਾਰਨਿ ਗਊ ਗਰੀਬ ਨੋ ਧਰਤੀ ਉਪਰਿ ਪਾਪੁ ਬਿਥਾਰਾ।

which is translated into "Less powerful were killed and thus the earth became replete with sin."




so i dont' know what my sahib means by "yaar" but dosent seem like he meant friend.


But than in zafernama is says the mugals were not true muslims. which means trues muslims would have never done those things. But than that would go against what bhai shaib is saying.

ਕਾਫਰ ਮੁਲਹਦ ਇਰਮਨੀ ਰੂਮੀ ਜੰਗੀ ਦੁਸਮਣਿ ਦਾਰਾ
which is translated into "Armenians and Rumis were declared apostates (Kafirs) and they were decimated in the Battle fields."


is zafernama authentic writhing of Guru Gobind Singh ji.
Screenshots_2016-02-15-10-00-09.png
Screenshots_2016-02-15-10-00-09.png
 

Attachments

Apr 12, 2007
351
262
Nobody knows the full truth as the original zafarnama it was destroyed. They created the new one out of someone else's interpretation that had read it. So how reliable that sources interpretation was who knows.
 

Jaswinderpal

SPNer
Feb 14, 2016
6
0
33
Nobody knows the full truth as the original zafarnama it was destroyed. They created the new one out of someone else's interpretation that had read it. So how reliable that sources interpretation was who knows.
NO
Nobody knows the full truth as the original zafarnama it was destroyed. They created the new one out of someone else's interpretation that had read it. So how reliable that sources interpretation was who knows.
 

Jaswinderpal

SPNer
Feb 14, 2016
6
0
33
Veerji .. zafarnama is entire a different thing but what we are talking is reference of mohd in Sri Guru Granth Sahib which i see no where. More over the quote of one of my brother of mohd is in Bhai Gurdas ji vaaran which have been wrongly translated by mr. Jodh singh . The translation by bhai sahib vir singh says yaar as companion of mohd which i have posted as screen shot. Which is think is right. Guru sahib rejected concept of prophet hood of islam.

I request all of you read the real text and dont depend on translations
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Featured Shabad

ਧਨਾਸਰੀ ਮਹਲਾ ੫ ਘਰੁ ੧੨ Dhansri Mehla 5 Ghar 12.


SGGS 683


ਬੰਦਨਾ ਹਰਿ ਬੰਦਨਾ ਗੁਣ ਗਾਵਹੁ ਗੋਪਾਲ ਰਾਇ ॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥ Bandna Har Bandna Gunn Gavho Gopal Raye. Rahao


Bandna –
Devotion. Har –...

SPN on Facebook

...
Top