Christianity Many Christians Believe That Jesus Is God. What Does Sikhism Say About It?

[Jass Singh]

My dear Inderjitji

Your apologies for your rudeness are accepted. You seem to want to stick to your guns even though you have been proven wrong. You are only interested in your opinion and not Truth or the SGGS.

It appears that you neither have Ahluwalia’s books nor have read them otherwise you would not call my quote,

this makes me howl your twisting things again and sidetracking oh my god you have to get some new material

You are not interested in objectivity. All you have to do if you have the book is turn to page 47 of his book, The Sovereignty of the Sikh Doctrine, where he writes:

“That Sikhism does not claim to be the final revelation of reality accounts for its non-exclusivity…”
Let me give you the full quote:
“That Sikhism does not claim to be the final revelation of reality accounts for its non-exclusivity which is reflected in its pluralistic conception of society…”

This is not twisting anything – it’s a direct quote! You are the one who is twisting and misrepresenting Ahluwalia’s thesis/doctrine. Because you do not have any philosophical training then even if you read the book you will not understand what he is talking about because he uses technical philosophical terminology. Since you do not have his books and have never read them & have no understanding of philosophical concepts and categories it is obvious that you do not represent Ahluwalia’s thesis. It is in fact your own manufactured opinions that you are so-calling the Sikh doctrine of Ahluwalia when it is really the Sikh Doctrine according to Dhillon, which neither reflects Ahluwalia’s thesis nor the teachings of the SGGS.

You deny being guilty of the fallacy of ad populum (appeal to popularity) by saying:

If I was doing this then surely I am wasting my time the consensus is 2 bilions Christians to 24 million Sikhs

This response only betrays your utter ignorance of the basic understanding of the fallacy of ad populum (appeal to popularity), inspite of the fact that I defined it. The more you write and try to fight back the more your push yourself into a tight corner from where there is no escape. You seem to hang yourself on your own rope. My dear friend, the majority we are talking about in the context is within the Sikh community not the world community.

Neither do you understand the fallacy of appealing to authority for you again commit the same fallacy by listing Ahluwalia’s credentials, of which I am well aware. I have great respect for the man himself but you cannot appeal to his credentials to justify his thesis – that is what this fallacy is about. If you do not understand these basic concepts of philosophy it is obvious that you would drown in the deep concepts discussed in Ahluwalia’s books.

You write that I :

go on to twist words again

When I quote from page10 of Ahluwlia’s book, The Sovereignty of the Sikh Doctrine:

There has been no conscious system-building attempt at presenting the Sikh doctrine in the form of a logically consistent framework – a gestalt-like organic structure – essential for knitting together Sikh ontology, Sikh ethics, Sikh sociology, Sikh polity, Sikh praxis into a coherent whole.

You write:

What this means if in fact it even exists is that the sikh doctrine is one, all other works have been written about Sikhism and no one has ever tried to rewrite the doctrine and guess what that’s straight from the horses mouth, here some more quotes:

My dear friend why do you even question the existence of this quote? Once again it is obvious that you neither have Ahluwalia’s books nor have read them otherwise all you have to do is turn to the page and check the quote. And what you have asserted my dear friend, is NOT what he is saying. You are TWISTING & MISPREPRESENTING him. His focus is not “rewriting” but “logic!” He talks about:

a logically consistent framework… a coherent whole.

This declares your statement that

logic and reason are annihilated

as utter nonsense! When are you going to muster the intellectual integrity to admit that you are simply wrong? Maybe you need to make a trip to India and meet Dr. Ahluwlia himself instead of TWISTING & MISPREPRESENTING him.

Be honest with yourself and step back & try not to be defensive but objective. Your assertions have fallen apart but you still want to lean on them. You have cut the branch on which you sit and do not even know it. It is OK to be wrong & it is OK to be proved wrong, but it is not OK to remain in DENIAL about your errors, fallacies and shortcomings (which are numerous) and keep fighting back with more and more ludicrous assertions. I have nothing against you personally, only your fallacious reasoning. I suggest you take a break and reflect on what I have said instead of lashing back in retaliation without thinking and I suggest you buy Ahluwalia’s books and READ them. God bless.

Jass Singh

 

[devinesanative]

Come on lets Celebrate , and Welcome New Year Dear .


Happy New Year .....

Dr. Ahluwalia might be enjoying and celebrating the New Year . And you both are fighting unnecessarily.

Come on Cheers ..........

 

[Jass Singh]

Devinesanative

It is my moral duty to expose fallacious arguments and beliefs otherwise I become an accomplice to their propagation. I am not fighting Inderjitjy – he is my Panjabi brother whom I love enough to try to correct his wrong views and ideas. There is a big difference between fighting or attacking the person (ad hominem fallacy) and demolishing fallacious reasoning. To argue for the sake of arguing is to generate non productive heat & is a travesty; to argue for the sake of Truth is a virtue. The WISE man learns & is WILLING to change his point of view when proved wrong.

I wish you a very Happy & spiritually fruitful New Year and look forward to knowing and understanding you even more in the coming year.

Jass Singh

 

[Jass Singh]

Inderjitjy

I wish you a very Happy New Year! I hope you are not bearing hurt feelings for I have tried to guide you not to win an argument. I guess you have been trying to save face and I have been too harsh and should have given you a way out. Maybe you did not articulate what you wanted to say & I misunderstood you. My apologies. Anyway once again I wish you a very Joyous & Spiritually uplifting New Year. I hope there are no hard feelings as we enter the New Year. Take care & God bless.

Jass Singh

 

[ISDhillon]

Satsriakal Jass Singh Ji, :}8-:

I do keep trying you wade you out of the swamp of ignorance which has engulfed your every pore but you seem to chuck it back in my face accept a helping hand when it is given to you for it is given in love, the amount of corrections needed in your last post are too many but as all ways I will try my best to guide you, you say:

“You are only interested in your opinion and not Truth or the SGGS.”

Are we talking about the bible here you see this is a clear and concise way in which you use my words against me it is the bible which is all about opinion there is not such thing as false truth does not have an opposite truth is ultimate reality which is bani I seem to be talking to a brick wall, again you have been proven to twist my words against me and you will not succeed, victory is not about winning I am not interested in winning anything this is a pastime if anything, but for your education, victory is inherent in all individuals you just fail to acknowledge the subjectivity of this the divine essence exists within all of us even you- now discover it for only then will you understand the true glory of sikhi.

And for your information I had these books a long time ago and again your quote does not state that that Sikhism is not the truth it states we can never fully sing the praises of god and even you with you underhand techniques knows this perhaps you have now ran out of the wealth of apologetic techniques i.e.: empty faith runs dry. I am amazed at how many times I have had to state this but that is never referred to because I have publicly proven you wrong but you remain steadfast to the “divine denial” that’s ok it is not a measure of my extant just yours.

Now I have been away for the last few days so have not had a chance to see what concoction you have delivered to this forum but I see you have continued your incessant whining and have even got to the point of being sarcastic about my ability to uphold my beliefs and the sikh doctrine, try with all your veracity the only skill you have is that of words which too are the same configured in a whole array of compositions which lead the ignorant ones further from the putrid message that you are trying to deliver, fallacy…error…reason…logic – you are mischievous and have no shame even when being exposed instead you try to gain momentum from other members on this forum who only turn around to slap you in the face.

Again there is no answer to any of my questions but a continual attempt to personally undermine my knowledge of the Sikh doctrine. You have not been able to sustain any of the many accusations you make against me instead you bring in sideliners which are an attempt to divert me away from the trite that Christianity is, if you would like a discussion on Christianity please answer the questions I have asked and I will be more than willing to ignite the lies and in such burning you may be enlightened. So far you have used much logic but can anyone on this forum (this is not an attempt at adpopulus or ad anything) say they have been enlightened to what you are trying to say, be real mate. I have debated with many people of differing faiths and with me you will have to come right back out of the agenda and start with simple talk other than this you are barking up the wrong tree and will continue to receive a roasting and face defeat as you have on this forum.

You then go further in the next couple of paragraphs about me personally slowly creating a deceptive web that you have now been caught in and have no escape, I am here on this forum today and everyday and challenge you to answer my questions if you cannot defend your beliefs then the best option for you is to confess your lies in the HOPE of salvation, there is at no point in this whole discussion where you have engaged in constructive debate instead you have attacked various learned people and this too is born out of fear, the fear that you will be discovered and you will not be able to continue a deceitful program against the Sikh sangat, tell me Jass Singh Ji where have I ever done this: “Your assertions have fallen apart but you still want to lean on them. You have cut the branch on which you sit and do not even know it” – I must ask you because contrary to popular belief I wouldn’t know.

I have been a silent spectator to many discussions I have learned one thing and that is you can try to talk till your blue in the face about Sikhism, make them think for themselves, but at some point you have to realise that it is not a struggle with the person to understand Sikhism it a struggle which is present within the mind of the unbeliever and that is something the unbeliever needs to resolve himself, you see in Sikhism we believe that when the chela is ready the guru appears well that’ is not the case with yourself you are far from ready to understand and accept the infallibility of Sikhism, I wouldn’t mind if you could prove me wrong but instead you build a database of realities which don’t exist and therefore ultimately you defy all that you attest to “objective truth”. The intellect is a powerful thing it is that which separates us from all other animal life and creation but what I have read from yourself over the years I would say you are a serious case against evolution, I will do ardas for your mat other than that it is the will of god, please respond by all means but with hard proof for the questions I have asked otherwise you are right when you say that I will “keep fighting back”. The Sikh doctrine is a sovereign perspective and as such a scheme of apologetics ill have no bearing on me I want real answers and not textbook rebuttals I need to know that you have fully grasped the idea of Sikhism and the angle with which we look and interpret other faiths otherwise you will remain in a quandary, be humble and accept your inadequacies as a non-believer and you will be embraced by a gyan that no books can reveal only the guru, yes Jass Singh Ji I can only do so much the rest is left to the guru..

I am not hurt at all and I hope you and all other Christians a happy new year, its supposed to be a promising year and I am very excited cant reveal too much but I my whole life is changing, slightly nervous though but I know Guru Ji will look after me. But I hope too continue to participate in this and many other forums.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa
Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

Inderjit Singh Dhillon :rofl!!:

 

[Jass Singh]

My dear Inderjit

Let’s get one thing straight – I am just refuting a single & solitary assertion of your, namely your claim that

logic and reason are annihilated

I have not even addressed anything you might say about Sikhism or Christianity. If you are UNWILLING to admit that this is a false assertion of yours, we cannot discuss anything at all. If you really believe

logic and reason are annihilated

it is utter nonsense to talk about proving me wrong. In your worldview you can never do that and only publicly announce your own ignorance & shortcomings. For according to your beliefs when I am wrong, I am right and this is perfectly compatible in your worldview. So what is your problem? It means that when you talk about ultimate reality, divine essence Sikh doctrine or Christianity or anything else it is utterly futile to do so in your worldview. In your worldview nothing is true and everything is true simultaneously & in the same sense! This is the height of lunacy and obviously you don’t believe your own worldview for you keep demanding proof.

In reality you have no belief whatsoever because your beliefs are compatible with their contraries thus amounting to nothing. According to your worldview, you cannot have any questions because contraries & contradictions are compatible in your worldview. So why do you keep going on about me answering your questions? I don’t have to answer any questions, for your own worldview says contradictions are compatible. You have no right to ask me to supply you:

with hard proof for the questions I have asked

Don’t you get it? Proof requires LOGIC but you say

logic and reason are annihilated.

There is no proving anything in your worldview.

Now once you realize and admit that you are wrong about this very basic fact, we can continue logical argumentation. But as it is you are demanding logical argumentation and at the same time saying

logic and reason are annihilated.

Even an imbecile can see the stupidity of your assertions. LOGIC is a priori and stands over and against anything you might say to the contrary. You cannot annul and cancel the laws of logic by fiat.

You do not even know when you talk nonsense for you turn around and say:

The intellect is a powerful thing it is that which separates us from all other animal life and creation

And just what do you think the intellect is if not the faculty to reason? In reality you eat your own words by using & demanding the use of Logic and at the same time deny the laws of logic.

Although you claim to have the books by Ahluwalia, I do not for a minute believe it for you are still denying the quotes which are in the book in black & white. After all how hard is it to turn to the relevant pages and check?

Let’s start at the beginning. Answer these questions on how logic was annihilated.
1. What is logic?
2. What are the laws of logic?
3. Which laws of logic were annihilated?
4. How do you define annihilation?
5. When were they annihilated?
6. Who annihilated them?
7. Why were they annihilated?
8. What is proof?
9. How do you prove something without logic?

That should be a good start & we can proceed to see just exactly what you mean when you say that:

logic and reason are annihilated.

BTW when are you going to get Dr. Ahluwalia to join our discussion and back your assertion that

logic and reason are annihilated?

Jass Singh

 

[ISDhillon]

Satsriakal Jass Singh Ji,

You are disturbing my New Year’s Day celebrations so I have turned the oven down to slow cook just for you, nevertheless I felt obliged to reply to your last response because you have misunderstood me. You keep talking about the word “false” - when Sikhism says satnam we are giving god the name and the name is truth, if god is all pervading their can be no opposite of truth because that which you deem as false is also pervaded by truth so there is no contradiction but you are confounded and I cant answer your last questions because I have a family waiting to enjoy a new years day dinner so have to go, but don’t start it as a new topic either but by all means stick to the topic concerned ie the compatibility of deity of Christ with sikh philosophy. AND FOR THE LOVE OF GOD ANSWER MY QUESTIONS!!!!!!!!!!!

Just a last note about logic and reason they are never important in matters of faith only scholorary interpretation of faith, but you keep mixing the 2 i.e. practicing Sikhism is not the same as reasoned argument or logical deduction a person conducting a study would use, so your assertion that reason is important in Sikh faith is baseless. If you would like to conduct a study you have come to the wrong place because a sikh philosophy on deity of a mortal will not be about reasoning but whether our bani agrees with such a notion and it does not.

Let the festivities commence,

Inderjit Singh Dhillon

:wink:

 

[Jass Singh]

Inderjitji

You are beginning to sound like a broken record and your denial of logic is the height of arrogance & self deception. It looks like you will stop at nothing to save face. Like I said we cannot have a meaningful intelligible discussion unless you repudiate your baseless assertion that

logic and reason are annihilated.

Until you are WILLING to do this, you yourself deny me and forbid me the opportunity to answer your questions because in a world where

logic and reason are annihilated

there is no point in discussing anything. In your worldview where

logic and reason are annihilated

Jesus is God is quite compatible with Jesus is not God and both are compatible with Sikh philosophy! Either take a class in logic or stop repeating the same nonsense that

logic and reason are annihilated.

Indirectly you yourself repudiate your claim that

logic and reason are annihilated

every time you write anything & ask for proof or insist that your view is correct and another incorrect. We could therefore move on and assume that you acknowledge that logic is a priori but do not have the courage or integrity to admit it.

Let’s put you to the test to clear up another matter. If you have the books by Ahluwalia as you claim, tell me which famous scientist is quoted in the 1st paragraph on page 127 of The Sovereignty of the Sikh Doctrine and what is the title of the book from which Ahluwalia quotes him?

Jass Singh

 

[ISDhillon]

Satsriakal Jass Singh Ji


“You are beginning to sound like a broken record”

I’m sure you feel right at home then; I AM QUITE FAMILIAR WITH A LONG AND ARDUOUS REPETITIVE WRITER. I don’t have the books by Dr Jasbir Singh ji like I said before I read them a long time ago and have donated many books to my local library and anyway I couldn’t care less, and I warn you do not get into badmouthing scholars because you can get done for defamation they only need your IP address so I would watch my words if I was you. Don’t put me on trial here you are the one who must be able to defend his faith and what a poor show you have put on for Christ he obviously is not as beloved to you as you may have once thought perhaps you are traversing towards sikhi and we will welcome you with open arms.

Now in your last post you go into this business of Christ can be god and cannot be god this is about what is right or wrong this is not about truth as I have stated before bani can only be truth as the author is god himself, therefore it is the truth that such a deity of man is impossible, now I am sure you will be thinking that in my worldview something impossible must be possible also because there is an opposite but this is not an opposite because god has no opposite that’s why we say ekonkar – 1 god not 2 or an opposite, truth in the form of SGGS states that such a right view is infact an opinion of those who are in dualism. Do you get what I am saying that is why we take hukumnama because truth is only what SGGS says all else is opinion, like bible etc.

I have never said there is no point in discussing anything I am saying you have to accept a Sikh viewpoint when given and not challenge the viewpoint of Sikhism with reason and logic because SGGS IS ALREADY TRUTH SO DOES NOT NEED TO BE PROVEN. And you are fitting a square into a circle when you go on and on about meaningful discussion because I can have meaningful discussion with anyone about Sikhism and I have never had the issues I have with you so I would look a little closer to home before giving me insults, I am not stubborn either I am quite an open minded guy anyone who knows me will vouch for that but I guess I will now be dubbed as appealing to the ad-populous, BTW the people who create all these words are not god either so how dare you use terminology of manmukh mortals it doesn’t even show up on spell-check.

I want to write sooooo much more especially about your attitude but I don’t think I could do an all-nighter instead I will give you time for some serious reflection, step back from the monitor and engage in some breathing exercise, when you get a reasonable thought let it slip back out of your mind and embrace your spirit and you will have the experience of cloud 9 , 10, 11 and much more. Don’t just think of truth become truth; forget right and wrong they will not go into the yond but your truth will i.e. your divine essence the spirit inside…..

Gurfateh!!!

Inderjit Singh Dhillon

Ps: don’t you think you’re cheeky to list a series of questions when you have answered none of mine or other members, and secondly I am not your Punjabi brother I do not subscribe to the punjbiyat or the bollywood complex nor am I a patriot, I am your fellow human being.

 

[Jass Singh]

Inderjit

So the truth is finally coming out and you finally admit:

I don’t have the books by Dr Jasbir Singh ji

All you said before was

I read them a long time ago

And now you add:

and have donated many books to my local library

The book is your primary source of inspirationfor the nonsense you havebeen spewing out & yet you do not have it. I don’t for a minute believe you ever had it or read it. The only information you have about Ahluwalia’s writings has come from online searches. Someone once said that this is collecting knowledge like a dog collects fleas – a few here & a few there.

But then you have the audacity to say:

and anyway I couldn’t care less

If you couldn’t care less, what have you been going on about claiming that based on Ahluwalia’s writings

logic and reason are annihilated

My dear friend, you are the one who is misrepresenting & in danger of defamation. If you can misrepresent yourself & Ahluwalia what credibility do you have? How can anything you say be taken seriously?

Then you want to chicken out by saying:

Don’t put me on trial here

Who else should have to justify what you say? You have made outlandish assertions & claims & now want to chicken out of justifying those positions.

You will end as the laughing stock of this forum if you go on saying things like:

Christ can be god and cannot be god this is about what is right or wrong this is not about truth

Go and take a class in logic, ethics & philosophy (especially epistemology for you do not seem to know what constitutes true knowledge nor the difference between truth & ethics) & then come back & talk to me. This also proves that you have never even seen a copy of Ahluwalia’s books let alone read them now or in the past.

It is pointless you digressing into rabbit trails such as dualism, the nature of God or about Hukamnamas until you know the nature of true knowledge (epistemology) which will involve the ontological status of the laws of logic. You have no idea what this means nor about what you are saying – you never did from the very start.

You claim:

I am not stubborn either I am quite an open minded guy

Oh really? Then why are you so unreasonable and can’t admit what is as plain as the nose on your face?

You have no idea what a mess you are getting yourself into for you then claim:

BTW the people who create all these words are not god either so how dare you use terminology of manmukh mortals

And who creates the terminology that you use such as “dualism” etc? FYI if you had ever read Ahluwalia’s books you would know that I have not used a single word that he does not use! This is the terminology of philosophers - you obviously are not a philosopher. This proves that you could not even begin to understand what Ahluwalia writes in his books. And once again it proves that you are fabricating lies when you say about Ahluwalia’s books:

I read them a long time ago.

You say this to save face but then you have to cover this lie by saying

and have donated many books to my local library

I see that you also chickened out of justifying your basic presupposition that:

logic and reason are annihilated

by not answering my questions namely:
1. What is logic?
2. What are the laws of logic?
3. Which laws of logic were annihilated?
4. How do you define annihilation?
5. When were they annihilated?
6. Who annihilated them?
7. Why were they annihilated?
8. What is proof?
9. How do you prove something without logic?

You do not have a leg to stand on -- all your assertions have been refuted and utterly demolished. You are a lost cause as far as I am concerned and a dishonest one at that and a VERY BAD LOSER. I do not think I need to continue in this dead end discussion with a dishonest & philosophically ignorant individual. If you like I will continue dialoguing with you on the understanding that you agree that logic and reason are the only means of meaningful discussion & argumentation.

Jass Singh

 

[ISDhillon]

Satsriakal Jass Singh Ji, :shock:

Initially I would like to say that all you have said about me is a lie again it would take real effort from someone who was really interested in the dynamics of your scheming clueless conundrum to research.

It seems from your last post that you want continue this tirade of proselytizing discourse I have come across your kind before, the preacher will go through a bout of sporadic hand movements and manages to conjure many bizarre facial contortions that they are so fond of, cherish your ill founded position and I am sure your congregation will laugh like hyenas I have seen the services they brandish their canines and chuckle, you do not make any justifiable position on any issue but because you engage in bravado and slander your ego is given more and more applause but nobody knows that the preacher is playing a game and so your charade continues to your last post. How embarrassing your conduct throughout this whole discussion and still you deny to accept all your argumentative failures to date and the dismissal of the many questions that have been put forward to yourself.

It is apparent that you have no coherent answer to the question concerned that Jesus Christ was a mortal plain and simple and this is the only conclusion we can arrive at from this discussion from an innocent discussion we now know that the little book of personal opinion is used as a leverage to spurn other faiths but a personal opinion is devoid of any qualification and must be treated a a non-entity therefore I think we have are all in final agreement that there is no evidence not even a historical truth claim that the bible was written by god or Jesus but that those who adored Jesus sought to over glorify him but today the faith crumbles as the lies are brought to the surface.

Jass singh ji we will not be lost in the mish-mash of words that you have displayed on more than one occasion, we will hold true to our principles and will listen attentively to all that you have to say and if there is anything that enlightens us we will honour you for it but to all the rest we openly declare that a deaf ear will be turned forthwith. The age today is not for information we have passed the information age and today we are only interested in something that can inspire us but your words are a series of fantasy statements and I am sure they are a mesmerising read to all that can understand it. I would advise you that it is more proactive for a challenged individual such as yourself to remain silent and start over with the learning process because one who learns is in fact a Sikh you must severe the links to your dead and wasteful convictions as they will not and have not aided you in your progress as a faithful adherent to whatever belief you claim to profess, they have in fact highlighted that you do not have any roots in any system of religion but are likened to a nomad who has no home and sleeps in stables, those who are born in stables are animals whether they continue to live in the premises or not.

Have some self-respect and take heed of my words before you tumble further in to the madness of your current state of psychosis, accept the word of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and give up all your unholy ways I have decided to help you with this by putting forward another shabad to help you be rehabilitated to the truth:

Without the True Guru, other songs are false.
The songs are false without the True Guru; all other songs are false.
The speakers are false, and the listeners are false; those who speak and recite are false.
They may continually chant, 'Har, Har' with their tongues, but they do not know what they are saying.
Their consciousness is lured by Maya; they are just reciting mechanically.
Says Nanak, without the True Guru, other songs are false. ||24||

Unless you can be more polite I will no longer be responding to you and this is for personal reason I have had my fair share for nonsense from you to last me a lifetime and don’t want to carry your words into the beyond so will have to turn a deaf ear to your manmat parchar.
Have a nice day,
Inderjit Singh Dhillon

 

[Jass Singh]

Inderjit

I will hold your feet to the fire for you are dishonest & philosophically ignorant. You lied about having the books by Ahluwalia, you lied about having read them, you lied about donating them to a library and you lied about your so called conviction that

logic and reason are annihilated.

You no more hold to this belief than you believe the moon is made of cheese for you know full well that logic and reason are the only means of meaningful discussion & argumentation.

You do not have a leg to stand on for all your assertions have been refuted and utterly demolished. You have your tail between your legs and are running about like a chicken with its head cut off. Like I said you are a very bad loser and your reflex action is to lash out with ad hominem attacks.

I am more than willing to engage you in a discussion on the deity of Jesus but as you correctly pointed out in your saner moments, the bigger and prior issue is the historicity of the New Testament. Since this must be settled first why have you not started a new thread on the historicity of the New Testament? I have been waiting patiently for you to do that. The ball is in your court.

Jass Singh

 

[devinesanative]

Dear Friend ,

I would suggest you to sit in a cool and lonely place , let your agitating mind settle into peace .

I can understand and visualize your position , as I have met persons like you .

This is not your fault dear , Please don't understand me wrong , A series of chain reactions have started inside you mind , which are unable to stop .

Yes , Just For the moment have rest to your brain and mind .

Whenever I come across people like you , I really feel pity .

So , Please do read Sahni Mohinder Singh jis (japjisahib04) posts , and learn something that how eloquently he replies to the posts .

 

[Jass Singh]

Dear devinesanative

You are very mistaken, highly deluded or grossly egotistical for you do not have the powers to read anyone’s mind or motives. This is nothing but pious sounding meaningless mumbo jumbo with no contribution to anything constructive. BTW I am still waiting for your new threads.

Jass Singh

 

[devinesanative]

Ego is one of the emotional state of being . It can neither be created nor destroyed , but it is there right from birth .

Ego cannot be eliminated . Elimination of ego means eliminitation of Emotions .

Take out the emotions from the human beings , and then they are nothing more like Robots.

Ego is like nuclear energy , you can use to destroy the whole world , or you can use it for the humanity.

It is the Ego inside human being which made them to progress , innovate and develop from the primitive to stone to iron to bronze to the present day scientific world.

It is the EGO which gave birth to many religions.


The day Ego will stop the progress and development will stop and will come to a standstill ie stagnant.

 

[devinesanative]

Dear Friend

You have great Talent and Innate abilities .

Why don't you write a book and show the world .

If you need any consultancy do contact me on this forum .

Dear friend the whole world is Mumbo Jumbo why don't you join the bandwagon . Come on ... join it ! Now !

If not Now ! then Never !!


Opportunity Strikes Once not twice .....

 

[agape]

I would advise you that it is more proactive for a challenged individual such as yourself to remain silent and start over with the learning process because one who learns is in fact a Sikh you must severe the links to your dead and wasteful convictions. Inderjit Singh Dhillon


reminds me of an old story where there is this this monk travelling around the country on his 'path' he travels around learning from all the great teachers. however he never seems to quite 'get it'. he searches high and low, engages in so conversation and discourse but in the end he gets more and more bewildered and lost. he is eventually guided to a very holy man in the hills. he quickly sets off on this great pligrimage to meet this great being.

after a long journey he gets there and this man invites him in. they talk for awhile, and compare opinions etc.. finally the holy man begins his teaching but this monk knows it all already.
he knows everything the man tells, puts it into context, compares it with this that and the other theory. the holy man conitues imparting his knowledge, the monk continues to belittle the monk by saying 'I know all this, if that is all you have to offer I have wasted my time.

the young monk gets up in anger. the holy man asks him to wait have a drink before he sets off on his journey. he makes a cup of tea and brings it in. offers the monk a cup. he gives him an empty glass and starts pouring the tea, he continues to pour even once this cup is full. the cup overfills and spills on the monks hand, scalding him.
the monk storms out in anger - not only have I been misguided and sent to you who has nothing to offer you are a fool too as you can't even judge a cup of tea.
the holy man bows his head humbly ' when you came here you were like the full cup of tea, everything I said to you overflowed. you didn't get any of it.
-for a cup to be useful it must be empty!!!!'

this is abit like bruce lee statement to live you have to unlive, to learn you have to unlearn - life is constant action then endevour towards unacting.

apologies jass singh for the poor grammer

 

[singhjiuk]

Re: Many Christians believe that Jesus is God, what does Sikhism say about it?

Dear friends
Sikhi is a unique religion and Gurbani is an ocean which has an answer to every question if one likes to accept it.
"They don't believe that Jesus is a god but son of god."
Bhai Gurdass ji in his warran(ballads) say that god himself took the form of Nanak and came to this world. (look in to varran bhai Gurdass ji, which is an accepted bani at Harmandir Shaib)

Furthermore if we look at Guru Guru Gobind Singh jis autobiography he has very clearly mentioned that god has appointed me as son and I have sent support the religion and defeat the tyranny.
I think we should others believe what they want stick Sikhi.
Rajinder Singh Panesar (PhD)

 

[singhjiuk]

Re: Many Christians believe that Jesus is God, what does Sikhism say about it?

sorry about the grammar in my last post, the line should read as follows
I think we should let others believe in what they want to believe and let us stick to Sikhi. That is true Sikhi
Thanks
Rajinder

 

[Hardev Singh]

Hello to all SPN members. It has abeen a pleasure and a journey of discovery whilst going through the materials.
Regards
Hardev