Islam Quran - To All Sikh Students

[BhagatSingh]

As I said on another post, I spent the last couple of years researching Islam as I have been looking for the truth and seeking a path that I can follow that will help me become a better person and realize God. For me, coming out of a year of reading the Quran and then discovering Sikhism is like shining a light on a beautiful flower. The contrast between what I came to learn of Islam and what I'm learning of Sikhism makes Sikhi appear as a brilliant orange lilly against a black velvet background. The darkness of Islam only makes the brilliance of the lilly more beautiful. And for that, I am thankful

At least someone found it useful.
I have realized it's hard to reason people out of Islam.
Kids maybe be easier but for the adults there is no hope.

 

[carolineislands]

At least someone found it useful.
I have realized it's hard to reason people out of Islam.
Kids maybe be easier but for the adults there is no hope.

I guess a person would have to work pretty hard to get their mind to accept things that are so profoundly inhumane. Then if they let it sit in there long enough maybe it gets like blood on a white carpet -- no matter what you do, it just ain't comin' out. :}:

 

[Sherab]

I guess a person would have to work pretty hard to get their mind to accept things that are so profoundly inhumane. Then if they let it sit in there long enough maybe it gets like blood on a white carpet -- no matter what you do, it just ain't comin' out. :}:

I prefer a wine stain to blood! :whisling:

I'm just kidding, sorry, the teenager in me is coming out.

 

[carolineislands]

It's not the first drinkin' joke I've seen here today!

 

[BhagatSingh]

It's not the first drinkin' joke I've seen here today!

hehe! :}{}{}:

 

[S|kH]

At least someone found it useful.
I have realized it's hard to reason people out of Islam.
Kids maybe be easier but for the adults there is no hope.

I think this can be said for people of all races, religions, and backgrounds.
Not just Muslims or Islam.

Reasoning with adults at gurdwara.....no hope. :}{}{}:

 

[kds1980]

I think this can be said for people of all races, religions, and backgrounds.
Not just Muslims or Islam.

Reasoning with adults at gurdwara.....no hope. :}{}{}:

Muslims in punjab can freely practice their religion.thye could even preach islam.Can sikhs freely practice islam in saudi arabia.afghanistan and other orthodx muslim countries.

 

[S|kH]

Muslims in punjab can freely practice their religion.thye could even preach islam.Can sikhs freely practice islam in saudi arabia.afghanistan and other orthodx muslim countries.

Punjab isn't a "Sikh Theocracy State" It is part of a larger democracy that allows Muslims to practice their faith freely in a state that just happens to be dominated by Sikhs.

If Punjab was an Orthodox Sikh Theorcracy State, we could analyze your comparison, but we can not, because it isn't. I can easily reply and say "If Punjab was a Sikh Theocracy, the Muslims would NOT be allowed to practice and preach." You would obviously say, "It is, because in the SGGS it also allows others to practice and preach on their own, and the SGGS would be the code of conduct of a Sikh Theocracy." Alas, we will never know the proper answer to the comparison you are trying to highlight because India is a democracy, or tries to be one, and Punjab is not a Sikh Theocracy.

Hence, the point you are attempting to make is completely invalid.

 

[carolineislands]

sIkh, pardon me for asking but or are you Muslim or Sikh? It's a little confusing for a newcomer.

An undercover Muslim, perhaps?

 

[kds1980]

Punjab isn't a "Sikh Theocracy State" It is part of a larger democracy that allows Muslims to practice their faith freely in a state that just happens to be dominated by Sikhs.

If Punjab was an Orthodox Sikh Theorcracy State, we could analyze your comparison, but we can not, because it isn't. I can easily reply and say "If Punjab was a Sikh Theocracy, the Muslims would NOT be allowed to practice and preach." You would obviously say, "It is, because in the SGGS it also allows others to practice and preach on their own, and the SGGS would be the code of conduct of a Sikh Theocracy." Alas, we will never know the proper answer to the comparison you are trying to highlight because India is a democracy, or tries to be one, and Punjab is not a Sikh Theocracy.

Hence, the point you are attempting to make is completely invalid.

You should read history of religions carefully.sikhs hardly stopped anybody from practising their religion .if any atocracies were committed against muslims that was because of retaliation.

It is well known fact that ancestors of .5 billion muslims were hindu's and budhists while
you will hardly find hindu's or buddhists whose ancestors were muslims.Is islam such a good religion that so many embraced while hardly any left it.It is a clear indication that muslims were mainly aggressors

sIkh, pardon me for asking but or are you Muslim or Sikh? It's a little confusing for a newcomer.

An undercover Muslim, perhaps?

He is not muslim.He is another typical atheist who beleive that all religions are evil and same but if I say that all atheists are russian communists which were responsible for millions of deaths in 20 th century I am sure he will surely disagree with me.

 

[carolineislands]

...You would obviously say, "It is, because in the SGGS it also allows others to practice and preach on their own, and the SGGS would be the code of conduct of a Sikh Theocracy."

So perhaps the former makes the latter an oxy{censored}?

Alas, we will never know the proper answer to the comparison you are trying to highlight

Of course you can, and precisely by using the point you just made. The nature of Islam excludes freedom of religious practices other than its own, thus making it a theocracy, whereas the nature of Sikhism is built on principles of freedom of religion making it a democracy. Therefore, a Muslim would be free to practice Islam in a Sikh nation, but a Sikh would not be able to practice Sikhism in a Muslim nation -- one being democratic by nature and the other theocratic at the core -- one accepts freedom of religion and the other does not.

Your own statement proves the point you are arguing against.

 

[thecoopes]

If a Sikh living in a Sikh state decided to leave their religion and openly convert to say Christianity or Buddhism, would the Sikh community go and smash his brains out?

If a Muslim living in an Islamic state did the same thing would they be likely to have their brains smashed out?

Freedom to a Muslim means freedom to wreck havoc on all and any that Islam deems unworthy, the belief that allows medieval barbarism to be measured out on humanity according to the dictates of intolerance comes straight from the Koran. Their holy book!

If Muslims were given freedom to choose with out fear of revenge, then how many Muslims would keep their faith?
Islam is the fastest growing religion; because it uses the same methods that both communism and Fascism used, mind control and terror!

 

[S|kH]

sIkh, pardon me for asking but or are you Muslim or Sikh? It's a little confusing for a newcomer.

An undercover Muslim, perhaps?

I am an undercover muslim. :roll:
I am a radical Sikh.
I am a Khalistani.
I am an African-American.
I am a Christian convert.
I am ..... beyond labels and identification.

I am ... human. :whisling:
and I'll help those who need help.
and I will always be against a religious dominated state regardless of what ideals the religion preaches.

So perhaps the former makes the latter an oxy{censored}?



Of course you can, and precisely by using the point you just made. The nature of Islam excludes freedom of religious practices other than its own, thus making it a theocracy, whereas the nature of Sikhism is built on principles of freedom of religion making it a democracy. Therefore, a Muslim would be free to practice Islam in a Sikh nation, but a Sikh would not be able to practice Sikhism in a Muslim nation -- one being democratic by nature and the other theocratic at the core -- one accepts freedom of religion and the other does not.

Your own statement proves the point you are arguing against.

The argument is still completely invalid because your using the ideal of one side and the reality of another and trying to draw a comparison with them.

Sikhism MAY allow one on paper to practice any religion, but a Sikh Theocracy we don't know, because there's NEVER been any. You can NOT use the Punjab state and its freedom of religion to expand the example to a sikh-ruled-religious state and say that it would be far better than any Islamic state ever.

Let's be real, you guys are quick to say Sikhs allow freedom of religion, but the Punjab state has the lowest male-to-female ratio in India. Where's the SGGS words on that? How come Sikhs aren't following that? In a Sikh ruled state, you would FORCE someone to follow the SGGS guidelines on it, and not commit female infoeticide (now people are starting to be *forced*) ... what about the alcohol consumption rate in Punjab currently? in a Sikh Theocracy, where SGGS is the code of conduct, you would essentially stop people from consuming immense amounts of alcohol... (Looks like people are losing their rights).
Suppose they were of a religion that allows intoxication of the mind (rasta ?)...Would you then allow freedom of belief and expression and freedom of choice to do whatever one wishes, or attempt to use the SGGS as a book of law ?

How come Sikhs are still drinking alcohol now ?

My point is to highlight how you can never use an idealistic philosophy in a comparison against something we can see and determine now. Take your theory to any scientific discussion and it'll quickly get destroyed. We simply do not know what would happen if the Sikhs ruled a state, but we do know about Islam. To say the Sikhs would only use the power of the new state to do good things or the idealistic things there SGGS states is completely incorrect. We can see what they do when they have a CHOICE in a DEMOCRACY in Punjab.

ANY religious state is a step backwards when we've already achieved DEMOCRACY.

If a Sikh living in a Sikh state decided to leave their religion and openly convert to say Christianity or Buddhism, would the Sikh community go and smash his brains out?

If a Muslim living in an Islamic state did the same thing would they be likely to have their brains smashed out?

Failed comparison because there is NO Sikh state. The ideals of a Sikh state would lead you to believe that they would allow freedom of religion and conversion, BUT in practice it is ALWAYS different. Hence, why NO religion should be ruling. This is how all dictatorships get started (Everyone thinks that they will do *good* for the people).

If a Sikh living in a Sikh state decided to NOT have a female child, would this openly be allowed? Well, we know that it is CURRENTLY happening.

If a Muslim living in a Islamic state decided NOT to allow the birth of his daughter, would this be openly allowed? Matters on the state, but their ratios are still far higher than anything Punjab has seen recently.

Freedom to a Muslim means freedom to wreck havoc on all and any that Islam deems unworthy, the belief that allows medieval barbarism to be measured out on humanity according to the dictates of intolerance comes straight from the Koran. Their holy book!

If Muslims were given freedom to choose with out fear of revenge, then how many Muslims would keep their faith?
Islam is the fastest growing religion; because it uses the same methods that both communism and Fascism used, mind control and terror!

Give power to any single person who solely believes in Religion and uses that as a code of conduct and they will wreak havoc on its citizens.

P.E.A.C.E.

Progressive Education Always Creates Enlightenment.

 

[kds1980]

If a Sikh living in a Sikh state decided to NOT have a female child, would this openly be allowed? Well, we know that it is CURRENTLY happening.

Its funny how atheists point out at punjab for female foeticide.but they themself don't look at abortions allowed by european countries.First atheists should ban abortions in europe then only they should preach sikhs about this.

 

[carolineislands]

The comparison goes like this:
Sikhism - freedom of religion
Islam - no freedom of religion

Are you now arguing against abortion and alcohol consumption?

Its funny how atheists point out at punjab for female foeticide.but they themself don't look at abortions allowed by european countries.First atheists should ban abortions in europe then only they should preach sikhs about this.

Perhaps the difference between fetocide and family planning is like the difference between terrorism and a military operation -- it just depends on who is doing it.

 

[BhagatSingh]

I think this can be said for people of all races, religions, and backgrounds.
Not just Muslims or Islam.

Reasoning with adults at gurdwara.....no hope. :}{}{}:

there is no point in trying to reason them out of SIkhism. But they do need to be more open minded.

 

[kaur-1]

Now that I have looked into Islam i.e. Koran/haddith ,whats going on in this world, anti-sikh sites created by baffoons, ex-muslims sites, Judaism and the history of the Jews etc etc etc.

The first thing that comes to my mind (after re-reading the originators first post) is

To the originator of this thread ------->you are a big time baffoon!


One definition of a baffoon:

:Vaaran Bhai Gurdas :Vaar32Pauri12:SearchGurbani.com

Vaar 32 Pauri 12 Stupid is not friendly to truth

ਅੰਨ੍ਹਾ ਆਖੇ ਲੜਿ ਮਰੈ ਖੁਸੀ ਹੋਵੈ ਸੁਣਿ ਨਾਉ ਸੁਜਾਖਾ ।
annhaa aakhay|arhi marai khusee hovai suni naau sujaakhaa|
The blind stupid one fights to the finish if he is called blind (intellectually) and feels flattered if called eyed (a wise one).

Line 1 ਭੋਲਾ ਆਖੇ ਭਲਾ ਮੰਨਿ ਅਹਮਕੁ ਜਾਣਿ ਅਜਾਣਿ ਨ ਭਾਖਾ ।
bholaa aakhay bhalaa manni ahamaku jaani ajaani n bhaakhaa|
Calling him simple minded makes him feel good but he would not talk to one who tells him that he is a silly person.

Line 2 ਧੋਰੀਂ ਆਖੈ ਹਸਿ ਦੇ ਬਲਦ ਵਖਾਣਿ ਕਰੈ ਮਨਿ ਮਾਖਾ ।
dhoreen aakhai hasi day balad vakhaani karai mani maakhaa|
He smiles at being called a carrier of the burden (of all) but feels angry when told that he is just an ox.

Line 3 ਕਾਉਂ ਸਿਆਣਪ ਜਾਣਦਾ ਵਿਸਟਾ ਖਾਇ ਨ ਭਾਖ ਸੁਭਾਖਾ ।
kaaun siaanap jaanadaa visataa khaai n bhaakh subhaakhaa|
The crow knows many skills but it crows jarringly and eats faeces.

Line 4 ਨਾਉ ਸੁਰੀਤ ਕੁਰੀਤ ਦਾ ਮੁਸਕ ਬਿਲਾਈ ਗਾਂਡੀ ਸਾਖਾ ।
naau sureet kureet daa musak bilaaee gaandee saakhaa|
To the bad customs the stupid refers as good conduct and calls the indurated faeces of cat, fragrant.

Line 5 ਹੇਠਿ ਖੜਾ ਥੂ ਥੂ ਕਰੈ ਗਿਦੜ ਹਥਿ ਨ ਆਵੈ ਦਾਖਾ ।
haytdi kharhaa doo doo karai gidarh hadi n aavai daakhaa|
As the jackal unable to reach and eat grapes on tree, spits over them, so is the case of a fool.

Line 6 ਬੋਲਵਿਗਾੜੁ ਮੂਰਖੁ ਭੇਡਾਖਾ ॥੧੨॥
bolavigaarhu moorakhu bhaydaakhaa ॥12॥
The foolish person is a blind follower like sheep and his obdurate talk spoils his relationship with every one.

 

[carolineislands]

"The foolish person is a blind follower like sheep..."

Doesn't it seem like the religious groups that turn out the most buffoons are the same ones that equate ideas with evil -- except their own. Everybody else in the world is going to hell except them. Nobody else in the world is innocent except them. Nobody else in the world has the "truth" except them.

That creates and maintains a herd mentality that allows people to do things like execute their members for opposing their thinking.

One thing I really love about Sikhism is the open mindedness and the encouragement to read and understand other wisdom and other cultures and other religions and people. This says to me that it is a faith that truly believes its own message. Because if you have to shield your members from exposure to any other ideas, then you really don't have much confidence in your own religion.

JMHO

 

[harpreet9]

very well said Caroline. I am glad there are people who can understand the cruelty and hatred spread by **********************

 

[S|kH]

very well said Caroline. I am glad there are people who can understand the cruelty and hatred spread by ************

Lol you thanked her for her post (which was brilliantly written) that spoke a lot about being open-minded ... and then you generalize an entire group of people and label them as ***************

That's probably the fastest i've ever seen a religious person become a hypocrite in my life. It didn't even take one sentence for you to spew out your hate.

Apologies to you SjKH. I had to edit your post because it contained wording from the previous comment which was, as you pointed out, prejudiced. The fault is not yours. Hope you understand. And I am sorry that I missed this comment back in January. Mod

and lol I'm a "big time baffoon"