Sikh News Use Of ‘Allah’ Should Not Be A Problem?

[Admin]

Malaysia, being a plural nation, must always strive to be a modern, multi-ethnic country where we are truly seen to be practising moderation. Our way of approach in life should show understanding in how others live, learning their culture and religion.


We have to show respect for each other’s religion. Moderate Malaysia means we must respect others as we would want others to respect us.
We have to show by action and deed that we are united and any differences we may have on matters of religion or race can be settled peacefully.


We have tackled many religious issues. Just see how our forefathers handled it, we can too.


The controversy over the use of “Allah” and seizure of Bibles have made something unpleasant in a pleasant land where we embrace people first in the spirit of 1Malaysia.


If it is people first, then their problems too should come first. It is time for us to do away with outmoded, primitive ways and practices.
Sikhs all over the world too use the word “Allah”, including those in Malaysia. The word is mentioned many times in our Holy Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. The Sikhs also call God by other names like Rab, Khudha, Har, Hari, and the like
.
And these words are also mentioned in the Granth Sahib, and have been used since the inception of the religion. Why the use of the word “Allah” should be a problem in Malaysia is beyond my understanding.
BULBIR SINGH,
Seremban.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

Comparing the SGGS and the BIBLE is like comparing Apples and Oranges...and therin lies the crux of the Malaysian Dilemma/problem...

You see in the SGGS..the Allah, the Hari..the Har Har..the Thakur..the narayan..the Waheguru, the Gopal...DO NOT DIFFERENTIATE..or set them APART....each is essentially INTERCHANGEABLE..the HARI of SGGS has the EXACT SAME "dimensions" as ALLAH..Raan..Narayan..Thakur..whatever...

BUT in the BIBLE..the "GOD" is NOT exactly the ALLAH as the Muslims regard Him to be...
In the Bible the GOD..has a "wife"..who is a Virgin..who gives Birth to a SON..who is also GOD...whereas the Islamic Version fo ALLAH is that He doesnt take Human Form, cannot marry/have wives/or sons...etc etc. In the Bible the GOD is a TRINITY..ALLAH STANDS ALONE..as the ALLAH ....in the SGGS !! So when the Christians insist on calling their @GOD/TRINITY as @ALLAH@...the Muslims have a problem with that.

SIKHS too should also have a "problem@ IF the Christians refer to their GOD/TRINITY as @WAHEGURU@ for a Sikh audience..simply because the WAHEGURU of the SIKHS is NOT the God/Trinity of the Bible..

Apart from that Father/Son/Ghost trinity nature of the Christian GOD...the WAHEGURU, ALLAH, Har, Raam Gopal etc etc etc in SGGS is of an entirely DIFFERENT CHARACTERISATION..the SGGS Creator is ALL LOVING/FORGIVING/BENEVOLENT....who never destroys for the fun of it..who never rains down TERROR..Fires Brimstones and HELL FIRE on entire Cities..or bring on Huge Floods to drown the Earth.. Plagues to kill first Born of Egyptians etc etc Favouritism..special Favoured Nations like Jews etc...etc etc...BLACK is NOT WHITE !!! Why some people Insist on WHITEWASHING the @BLACK@ is far beyond me...BLACK remains BLACK...no matter hwoi much whitewashing take s place...

 

[Lee]

Comparing the SGGS and the BIBLE is like comparing Apples and Oranges...and therin lies the crux of the Malaysian Dilemma/problem...

You see in the SGGS..the Allah, the Hari..the Har Har..the Thakur..the narayan..the Waheguru, the Gopal...DO NOT DIFFERENTIATE..or set them APART....each is essentially INTERCHANGEABLE..the HARI of SGGS has the EXACT SAME "dimensions" as ALLAH..Raan..Narayan..Thakur..whatever...

BUT in the BIBLE..the "GOD" is NOT exactly the ALLAH as the Muslims regard Him to be...
In the Bible the GOD..has a "wife"..who is a Virgin..who gives Birth to a SON..who is also GOD...whereas the Islamic Version fo ALLAH is that He doesnt take Human Form, cannot marry/have wives/or sons...etc etc. In the Bible the GOD is a TRINITY..ALLAH STANDS ALONE..as the ALLAH ....in the SGGS !! So when the Christians insist on calling their @GOD/TRINITY as @ALLAH@...the Muslims have a problem with that.

SIKHS too should also have a "problem@ IF the Christians refer to their GOD/TRINITY as @WAHEGURU@ for a Sikh audience..simply because the WAHEGURU of the SIKHS is NOT the God/Trinity of the Bible..

Apart from that Father/Son/Ghost trinity nature of the Christian GOD...the WAHEGURU, ALLAH, Har, Raam Gopal etc etc etc in SGGS is of an entirely DIFFERENT CHARACTERISATION..the SGGS Creator is ALL LOVING/FORGIVING/BENEVOLENT....who never destroys for the fun of it..who never rains down TERROR..Fires Brimstones and HELL FIRE on entire Cities..or bring on Huge Floods to drown the Earth.. Plagues to kill first Born of Egyptians etc etc Favouritism..special Favoured Nations like Jews etc...etc etc...BLACK is NOT WHITE !!! Why some people Insist on WHITEWASHING the @BLACK@ is far beyond me...BLACK remains BLACK...no matter hwoi much whitewashing take s place...

Sorry Jarnail Ji,

I find this 100% wrong.

There is as we know one God who's attributes cannot be described even though 100,000 pages be written.

In fact the God of the Muslims must be the same God of the Sikhs(as there is only one God) and the same God as the Christians(as there is only one God).

Black and White are not the same, this is true, but when used as alogory for God, then God is both black and white.

The most we can say is that concept A of God does not agree with concept B of God, however even saying this is I belive wrong, for if God is all then both concepts A and B must be true, otherwise God is not all and that I just cannnot belive.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

Lee Ji,
ITS NOT "GOD"..that is arguing...its the Christians who insist they must use "Allah" in Malaysia...and not confine it to just God/jehovah/Jesus..which he Mulsims insist cannot be allowed as they use Allah. Sikhs are trying to butt in by quoting the SGGS use of ALLAH which is not at all the same way the Christians wnat to sue the word..so its essentially a HUMAN FIGHT....and HUMANS will DECIDE...in the case of malaysia..the Muslims will WIN...and in UK/USA..the Christians will WIN...depending on WHO RULES the COUNTRY. God is nowhere in the equation...

 

[Satyaban]

Namaste

Gyani ji:
I don't understand the situation in Malaysia but what name a person uses when referring to God, unless slanderous of course, is fine with me. The word used usually indicates one's mode of worship doesn't it?

My faith is said to have from 108 to 1,008 names for Lord Shiva. Also we have uncountable demigods but they are not separate Gods but names for the many different aspects and many are localized but they are all The Creator.

I have been called a pagan and pantheist by many. Some understand when I explain and many don't. Christians are the hardest until I mention their trinity and things click for some. But the difference remains in the personage of Jesus who they believe to be God incarnate. I leave that aspect out of our conversations and tell them I think they have given names to three aspects of God.

Gyani ji said "who never destroys for the fun of it..who never rains down TERROR..Fires Brimstones and HELL FIRE on entire Cities..or bring on Huge Floods to drown the Earth.. Plagues to kill first Born of Egyptians etc etc Favouritism..special Favoured Nations like Jews etc...etc etc...BLACK is NOT WHITE !!! Why some people Insist on WHITEWASHING the @BLACK@ is far beyond me...BLACK remains BLACK...no matter hwoi much whitewashing take s place..."

All of this comes from the Old Testament. A Jewish book written by people who thought they were chosen by God. All the punishing acts happened to outsiders. Their ten commandments applied to their monad only as exemplified by the book of Deuteronomy, with God's(?) orders to break 9 of their commandments in cities they conquered. They somehow needed God's cooperation for their barbaric behavior and found a prophet to filll the bill. It was a political decision for the earliest of Christians to continue the use of the Torah. I think modern Christians accept natural disasters for what they are but still accept the "miracles."

In conclusion I believe The Creator has no name nor needs any because there is no entity to be confused with.

Peace
Satyaban

 

[Archived_Member_18]

sat sri akal ji
well evryone can call GOD by any name as they wish to ,,,,
GOD has infinite names as many of them r written in "JAAP SAHIB JI"
so its shd not be any prb to call GOD by any name the thing is to respect GODand obey GOD and live in GOD's hukam and never forget GOD
we can call god by WAHEGURU or by ALLAH or by RAM or simply GOD or any other name........

 

[spnadmin]

Please forgive me for the interruption. There may be some difficulty in thinking through the situations in Sikhi when "Allah" can be understood as a name of God, and when "God" is not even appropriate as a term in Sikhism.

This issue will take more time to unravel than I have on my hands right now. But do we not need to clarify when it makes sense to think of Allah as God in Sikh practice? For example, imagine me in simran calling out "Allah, Allah, Allah"-- and my husband hears this and says, "What is going on?" I thought it was 'WAHEGURU, WAHEGURU, W'AHEGURU?" And then on Sundays I used to hear you going around house saying, "Akaal, Akaal, MahaAkaal" with great enthusiasm. Now you are saying "Allah, Allah, Allah!" What sensible explanation can I give to him?

So we may need to get back into a discussion of usage, In My Humble Opinion. At one level Allah is "a" name of God. At another level "God" is a Christian name for the Creator, and not one that makes a lot of sense within the Sikh dharma. At other levels the Sikh names for God that make sense are Akaal or Waheguru or Hari. That was I think where Gyani was headed in his explanations. And I am trying to clarify this problem by pointing out that I wouldn't now do simran calling on Allah, or the Father in Heaven; or the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost,;or for that matter to Ram or to Hari. It is a little too far-fetched.

 

[harbansj24]

I remember as a child in Bangalore our mother used to insist that we say waheguru for 5 minutes in the morning just after waking up and just before going to sleep in the night.

During school vacations she would collect score of small kids in the locality around her and asked them to chant "Jai Gobinda, Jai Gopala!" The kids would lustily yell "Jai Gobinda, Jai Gopala" This would go on for about 10 minutes. At the end of that she would take out toffees and distribute among the kids. We asked why she was doing that. She replied that remembering God or doing Simran is a completely secular activity so she was trying to inculcate Simran in the kids in the terms they were familiar with! I remember the parents of the kids comming and thanking my mom for this. She would also identify a sprinkling of Christian Kids and in a heavily accented manner ask them to recite "Our Father who art in Heaven.......!" There would mirth all around.

 

[spnadmin]

Tonight I am not budging. Not going to be flexible I am going to be very inflexible and unmovable about this. :u): Call me a fundamentalist. I don't mind. :}8-:

 

[Lee]

In My Humble Opinion. At one level Allah is "a" name of God. At another level "God" is a Christian name for the Creator, and not one that makes a lot of sense within the Sikh dharma.

Just one tiny little correction for you Narayanjot ji.

The word God is of course not a Christian name for the creator, but the English descriptive word used for the creator.

What you have said here is like declaring that 'Man' is an Enlgish 'Name' for a male.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

Lee Ji..
From what i understand..@ descriptive@ has to describe..somewhat like what an adjective does...
so God the Father..is an adjective..God the Son..is also an adjective..and Holy Ghost the God is also an adjective..but i fail to see how God is an adjective ??
When we are shown God the father..He is shown a sort of Father Christmas..white flowing beard...@father@ like..and when he is God the Son..he is Jesus..and God the Holy ghost..is..well a ghostly spirit...like what we see in ghost catchers..apparition type..
But GOD alone...how is it descriptive ? imho its a Proper NOUN...Name !! The previous NOUN is of course JEHOVAH which is suppsoedly never to be @mentioned@..?? or am i wrong ?? i seem to have read or been told that Jehovah must not be brought to the tongue..sorry if this is wrong info.
Omnipotent..Omnipresent..Omni this and Omni that..are all descriptive attributes of the Creator...and a few are given in Japji ..Satnam..akla moorat..karta purakh..nirbhau..nirvair...ajoonee...saibhang..etc are all descriptive aspects attributes...TRUTH is His Name !! becasue ONLY @TRUTH@ is always TRUE !! SATNAM ( aunkard mark bottom of M in Satnam(u) is actually a Gramattical marker to CAPITUALISE the @S@ as is done in English Grammar to mark Proper NOUNS....so the @S@atnam is not any ordinary satnam..BUT THE ONE and ONLY SATNAM.
Please do add further..i am enjoying this...

 

[Lee]

Jarnail ji,

Yes I can see what you mean, so let me try to explain it this way instead.
When I say that God is a discriptive word rather than a name I mean it describes what we are talking about.

Like if I was to say:

I saw a red car the other day.

The word 'Car' is descriping what kind of object I saw.

In a similar vein then if I was to say:

I dreamed of the God Shiva last night.

The word 'God' describes what kind of entity Shiva is.

 

[Gyani Jarnail Singh]

Lee ji..I am not sure if i got you..but i will sleep on it..maybe Guru Ji will bless me with soem understanding by amritvela..Thanks ji
Satnam

 

[AusDesi]

I am not getting the problem?

Christian Arabs all over the middle east use 'Allah' as a name for God - the father, the son and the holy ghost.

 

[spnadmin]

Just one tiny little correction for you Narayanjot ji.

The word God is of course not a Christian name for the creator, but the English descriptive word used for the creator.

What you have said here is like declaring that 'Man' is an Enlgish 'Name' for a male.

What is the Christian name for God? Dieu? Dio? Deus? Dios? Dumnezeu? Бог? Gott?

Thanks for the correction. So I am left with the same issue nonetheless. I do not say God God God God in simran. I left out Yaweh. I do not say Yaweh Yaweh Yaweh.

 

[Lee]

What is the Christian name for God? Dieu? Dio? Deus? Dios? Dumnezeu? Бог? Gott?

Thanks for the correction. So I am left with the same issue nonetheless. I do not say God God God God in simran. I left out Yaweh. I do not say Yaweh Yaweh Yaweh.

Heh I think realisticly you can use whatever name you wish, whatever you are comfatable with or whichever is culturaly relevant. I use Waheguru in simran, and God in conversation.

As to the Christian name of God, I know YHVH is the Hebrew (Yod, He, Vah, He) which can translate as Jehova, or Yaweh. The Hebrew charector Yod is accetably transtalted to the English letter J or Y.

You can thank my years studying the Qabbalah for than one.

 

[spnadmin]

Heh I think realisticly you can use whatever name you wish, whatever you are comfatable with or whichever is culturaly relevant. I use Waheguru in simran, and God in conversation.

As to the Christian name of God, I know YHVH is the Hebrew (Yod, He, Vah, He) which can translate as Jehova, or Yaweh. The Hebrew charector Yod is accetably transtalted to the English letter J or Y.

You can thank my years studying the Qabbalah for than one.

Thank you for your exactitude :happy: Still another question out there. The context for a Sikh in simran? Can it really be any word for God?

 

[Lee]

Thank you for your exactitude :happy: Still another question out there. The context for a Sikh in simran? Can it really be any word for God?

Well I don't see why not. Sikhi as we are often told is an inclusive dharma open to anybody anywhere in the world. It is, I think, human nature to attribute to God according to ones culture.

This is of course only my take on things, but I don't think I'm wrong on it. That is to say when you look at Sikhi in a rational way, I can see no logical inconsitancies with the idea.

 

[spnadmin]

Well I don't see why not. Sikhi as we are often told is an inclusive dharma open to anybody anywhere in the world. It is, I think, human nature to attribute to God according to ones culture.

This is of course only my take on things, but I don't think I'm wrong on it. That is to say when you look at Sikhi in a rational way, I can see no logical inconsitancies with the idea.

OK! That answer will steer the discussion into a direction that has a strong focus on questions about religion or spirituality, doctrine and insight, identity or practice, interpretation of Banee (be careful not to be called to India on that ), devotion and rationality, vichaar of Sri Guru Granth Sahib and personal religious interpretation, the question of who is a Sikh.

Great!

From the original post If it is people first, then their problems too should come first. It is time for us to do away with outmoded, primitive ways and practices.
Sikhs all over the world too use the word “Allah”, including those in Malaysia. The word is mentioned many times in our Holy Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. The Sikhs also call God by other names like Rab, Khudha, Har, Hari, and the like

Is this a very broad opinion on the bart of Bulbir Singh? Is it gurmat for Sikhs to apply it in every context of Sikhi?

 

[Lee]

OK! That answer will steer the discussion into a direction that has a strong focus on questions about religion or spirituality, doctrine and insight, identity or practice, interpretation of Banee (be careful not to be called to India on that ), devotion and rationality, vichaar of Sri Guru Granth Sahib and personal religious interpretation, the question of who is a Sikh.

Great!

Hahah my dear Narayanjot you may be correct. It is a discusion that I have entered into before and been told off!

It is also a discussion that I think is important. If Sikhi IS open to all, then I see nothing wrong in using culturaly relevant ways to practice.

Now having said that let me clarify it. You may remember elsewhere I have said that we cannot change bani, nor can we change the way of the dharma we practice, but we certianly can cut out culture from dharma and replace it, if applicable with ones own culture.

This may start a minefield but here we go.

I have often pondered over the relevance of Turban for a Western Sikh.

I undertand that it is correct manors to cover ones head when Guru is present. Yet I am English, and in English culture is is consided bad manors to cover the head when setting foot in a house of God(read: Church).

In reality I dare say God who knows all and is all, cares only that one does show respect, irrigardless of cultural practices that do so.