OnPathToSikhi

But you seem to go keep on going back to the same point of Arabs naming the people on the subcontinent and you seem to give it great weight in your arguments, so who is the slave me or you?

people of subcontinent ..? Yes, let it out. What was the name given by your masters?

Yes, what do you think of my master calling guru Arjun dev as Hindu?

You and your master jahangir. You are his slave. You should listen to whatever he says.

Muhaaaaaaaah oh tere you think you are getting me angry? I don't get angry have thick skin..

The only thing that gets me mad is little kids calling me uncle ji at the temple, and the smell of tharka

Learning very well from your masters.

I'm reminded of a story from the jahangirnama it goes something like this " on the banks of the river Ravi lived a Hindu named Arjun"

You should listen to what your master jahangir says.

Your Moghul masters also gave you the same name.

Caught in a trap! Aren't you. You can't even eat your own grapes now. Check with your masters what you should do.

So, I guess our master called us both Hindus.

Your mughal master. Who gave you the name "Hindu".

Sour grapes?

Eat them and enjoy them. Your masters gave your a "fruit" basket probably with a name tag - "Hindu".

1000 years eh? Why don't you put up the dates? And we can have a discussion. But I know you won't do that because it will blow your entire theory out of the water.

Yeah we'll put up the dates, it goes more than 1000 years. Yeah, don't crap yet.

First, check with your masters what name we should call you with.

Yes, I have to hand in my report weekly. Lol

Correct.

More interested in politics and khalistanis.

No. You are here because of your own insecurity and inferior complex.

Which goes back to my original issue of copying or modifying ancient teachings and trying to sell them as new.

What teachings? Have you read them? Do you understand them?

Care to elaborate on this?:

"There is nothing noble in being superior to some other man or woman. The true nobility is in being superior to your previous self."

The Vedas

" Neti Neti" - I'm neither this nor that

And give up thousands of years of history? For what?

We know (in fact the world knows) that you enjoy slavery. Yes, don't give up thousand's of years of "history". Makes sense.

As a Hindu, I don't need to learn anything from Sikhism. Its the other way around.

So what are you doing on a Sikh forum.

For the Arabs everybody on this subcontinent was Hindu, therefore, Sikhs are hindus.

What happened. Scared already?

You listened to your masters and remained Hindus. So now enjoy your title given to you by your mughal masters.

Sikhs were, are and will always be free.

Arabs did not invade india much. their attacks were repulsed in the centuries following Mohammad's death.

You were named "Hindus" by a few mughal invaders? Shame.

Your other comments are disregarded already since they either baseless or convoluted.

Let us focus on these two for now:

Sikh simply means student.

Simply? OK. Please explain - Student of?

The arabs, persians and other foreigners called all those people who lived on the eastern side of river Sindhu as Hindu.

1. You aka "Hindu" are living on a name given by Arabs, persians & other foreigners.? What do You call yourself? Or should we say that these "other" foreigners left a mark of slavery which you are still feel "proud" of?
2. A set of people being identified based on geographical boundaries. When did this become a "religion"? Possibly this was "gifted" by the Arabs, persians & other foreigners?

Or the martial aspect was deliberately dumbed down.,

It was not. It is due to a mind entrenched in slavery and insecurity.

Hindu followers took their share and Muslims took theirs. What did 'sikhs' get? why they are not even mentioned!!

Moron. How many times to tell you. These "Hindu" & "Muslims" were the Sikhs. You don't get it do you?

So here we go again ..

sati das Mati das were brahmins who followed their faith like their forefathers, no deviation.

Bhai Mati Das & Bhai Sati Das were both Sikhs. If you know what "Sikh" means.

banda bahadur was a vaishnav when Guru sahib approached him and he died a vaishnav.

Banda Singh Bahadur was a Sikh. Again, if you know what a "Sikh" means.

Question for you.

Do you know what Hindu means?

I don't know what that is. If you are trying to put me down it's not working.

I am just giving you the facts. Don't like them, it is up to you.

Be careful with how you use your words. It's better to say "No comments here" and move on.

I have abundance of more comments. navjot giddad sidhu is a tankhiya.

Aa vekho pakhandi diyan kartootan:

Then you need to contemplate the gurbani more.

Agreed.

It shows you are just paying lip service, just saying things without any actual experience of the thing, of the words that you are using. Words like One, becoming zero, Waheguru, human, etc. You have yet to experience them.

No comments here.

Your own knowledge about Gurbani seems very limiting. Looks like you are enforcing that limit on you yourself.

From what I know about him, he has already developed himself spiritually a great deal.

A murderer being played out very well by the bjp goons. You are one of them. Concluded.

Have you not been paying any attention to any of the Gurbani quoted in this thread?

I have.

Now do you accept that kameena sidhu was wrong!

Yes it's all One.

What does does it mean "It's all One"?

That means that everything is Waheguru, everything is a part of Him.

What about all the forms?

All the forms all the eyes, mouth, hands, feet, nose, bodies, statues, shapes, idols, mountains, lakes, trees, planets, stars, etc, these are all forms of Waheguru.

What happens when you find out? What does it mean to be a human, a form of Waheguru? What does it mean to be One with Waheguru? What have you found in the ongoing process? What does it mean to believe in Waheguru?

First I see His forms, then I look inside and see Him there as formless projecting Himself as Bhagat Singh, then I look outside again and see Him in all the forms, appearing as the forms themselves, no distinction.

Waheguru appears to me as form, wherever I look. He looks back through His forms. Then it feels like it is Waheguru looking outside, looking inside, looking around everywhere, looking back at Himself like multi-dimensional mirror. What a game!

What about all the 'forms'? Still ONE.

A game indeed! A game of love.

Waheguru has countless forms, simultaneously He has no form. It's not one or the other, it's both!

Wrong again! I don't think you even contemplate on what our Guru says.

It is all ONE. Creator & The Creation. All ONE.

Of course I'll help. Go ahead, describe the co-relation.

I will sure per my understanding. Let us see what you have go to say first.

Where can we read Uddadanti ?

That is a typo. Should read Ugardanti.

Have you found out? What did you find?

That is an ongoing process.

Now that we have some basic mutual understanding and you are agree that there is only One True Formless Waheguru and there are no 'forms of Waheguru', let us come back to the discussion.

I am going to put forward a few words in context of sidhu's speech. Help me figure out the co-relation.

Guru Arjan Dev Ji, krishan, arjuna from mythology & Waheguru.

True. I am not talking about expectation however, I am talking what actually happens. So what happens?

In reality, you(I) become zero.

True. I am not talking about expectation however, I am talking what actually happens. So what happens?

That is for the person to find out.