Jump to content

Sikh Answers

  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About Sikh Answers

  • Rank
    Nayana Bacha||Nayani Bachi
  1. Second Part I disagree with this point. Idol is idol regardless of what one believes or thinks. This is about the truth not about perception. Hindus can justify their idol worship by saying that they don’t believe Waheguru is limited to their idol but it doesn’t change the fact..”Pahan Mein Parmeshar Nahin”. Pictures are not different either. Creation gives no gyan only the eternal Shabad does. Waheguru’s saroop is Shabad. Gurbani is the true saroop of Waheguru because it will never die and is above maya. My point was to highlight the fact that Shabad is not sargun but nirgun
  2. Neo Singh, your last post made some things clearer for me to understand your viewpoint. However, I disagree with some points while agreeing with other points. This post should make it clear for you what my viewpoint is. This would be a true statement only if Gurbani proof was provided. Stating that sargun is saroop of Waheguru does not prove that sargun must be worshipped. I would also like to see where in Gurbani it is stated that first stage is sargun pooja and then one moves on to nirgun. Also, when one rises to nirgun pooja, what happens then? How does one do ustat of Akal Purakh a
  3. Here is the last portion of the post. For some reason it won't allow the entire post. We both agree that Jot of Waheguru is everywhere and within everyone. I understand you do not negate Nirgun and call it the ultimate goal in Gurmat. I disagree and I call it the only goal in Gurmat. You propagate that worship of anything that has Jot of Waheguru is sargun pooja and acceptable in Gurmat as long as one also does nidhaasna. Then please answer these questions. 1) What is the proof that Jot of Waheguru is in stones? Dasam Granth says otherwise and in Zafarnama Guru Sahib calls Himself “idol
  4. Sargun pasara and sargun worship are two different things. While sargun pasara is accepted in Gurbani (in fact only Satguru preached this during that time), sargun pooja is not supported. I would appreciate you providing some Shabads which advocate sargun pooja. Word Sargun is defined as ਸਰਗੁਨ - ਗੁਨ ਸਹਿਤ, ਜਿਸ ਵਿਚ ਰਜੋ ਤਮੋ ਸਤੋ ਤਿੰਨੇ ਮਾਇਆ ਦੇ ਗੁਣ ਹੋਣ । Those who worship sargun will never rise above the maya because they are worshipping the creation (maya) and not nirgun. One cannot rise above something they are worshipping. It is irrational to assume that one worshipping creation will ha
  5. My posts are not showing up? If I am under moderation then for what reason?
  6. I could have misunderstood. You wrote in your post If a bhagat does bhagtee of a devta in a form of an idol thinking it is his ishtdev or waheguru, would he not get brahmgyan according to you? Sargun worship always involves some type of form or idol. Sargun refers to maya or the creation which means sargun worship is worship of anything that is within maya. So anyone worshipping maya will never be able to rise above it. The creation is temporary and an illusion in a sense. Also, what is “bout pooja”? I took it as idol worship or “butt parasti”. Idol worship is idol worship. It
  7. Neo Singh quotes from Akal Ustat to justify that sargun worship is also acceptable but the pankti itself only supports prema bhagti. Next paragraph makes it clear what is not acceptable. The Shabad is: ਕਾਹੂ ਲੈ ਪਾਹਨ ਪੂਜ ਧਰਯੋ ਸਿਰ ਕਾਹੂ ਲੈ ਲਿੰਗੁ ਗਰੇ ਲਟਕਾਇਓ ॥ ਕਾਹੂ ਲਖਿਓ ਹਰਿ ਅਵਾਚੀ ਦਿਸਾ ਮਹਿ ਕਾਹੂ ਪਛਾਹ ਕੋ ਸੀਸੁ ਨਿਵਾਇਓ ॥ ਕੋਊ ਬੁਤਾਨ ਕੋ ਪੂਜਤ ਹੈ ਪਸੁ ਕੋਊ ਮ੍ਰਿਤਾਨ ਕੋ ਪੂਜਨ ਧਾਇਓ ॥ ਕੂਰ ਕ੍ਰਿਆ ਉਰਝਿਓ ਸਭਹੀ ਜਗ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਭਗਵਾਨ ਕੋ ਭੇਦੁ ਨ ਪਾਇਓ ॥੧੦॥ In Shabad Hazaray, Guru Sahib says: ਕਹਾ ਭਯੋ ਜੋ ਅਤਿ ਹਿਤ ਚਿਤ ਕਰ ਬਹੁ ਬਿਧਿ ਸਿਲਾ ਪੁਜਾਈ ॥ ਪ੍ਰਾਨ ਥਕਿਓ ਪਾਹਨ ਕਹ ਪਰਸਤ ਕਛੁ ਕਰ ਸਿਧ ਨ ਆਈ॥1॥ Clearly, idol worship is rejected by
  8. He became Shaheed in 1704 therefore he must have completed it prior to his shaheedi. Also, no one has raised any objection to it nor declared it work of later time. I bet you had probably never even heard of it before I mentioned it. It includes eye witness account of Shaheedi of Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji and so many other events that are not found anywhere else. Yes but no scholar believes that rehatnamas found today are the original ones or copies of the original. Rehatnamas of Bhai Chaupa Singh was huge in size but today we only get small portion of it. So unless you can provide an origi
  9. Answers, rebuttals and debates can be found here http://searchsikhism.com/islam.html On this forum the debate took place around December 2006. Umar isn't active anymore.
  10. I will keep it short and to the point to save my time. False. This is a Granth called Siri Gur Katha which also includes eye witness account of Shaheedi of Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji and physical description of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. It is not simply a rehatnama. It was completed before 1704. Chaupai Sahib was completed in 1696. Who is “us”? You and who else? Why not get a copy yourself. Surely I can scan but will you accept it just by reading those few lines? I don’t think so. Here is the link which gives little more info. http://www.sikhsangat.com/index.php?showtopic=38445&hl=
  11. This topic is about Bhagauti not Chrittars or Akal Ustat. So what exactly did you prove by quoting him? Nothing. Stick to the topic. I never got mad at him. I don’t need to run to the mods for anything. Do you have any fact to back up your claims? Your statement has nothing to do with this topic. Ever wonder why you are getting warnings from mods on this forum? Once again, this topic is about Bhagauti but you choose to jump around and never stick to the topic. Reminds me of the debate Singhs had with Noormahal’s chela who kept changing the topic and never addressed the points. Pathetic
  12. Go here http://www.sikhmarg.com/your-view.html Post by Surjeet Singh dated June 1, 2009 has all the names but mine is not listed. His statement has no link, no official proof and he did not include any email to support his allegations. Anyone can fabricate a statement and put any names in it. I know Inder Singh and some of PW members and they are not RSS. Regardless, stick to the topic and stop making up lies. I am not ignoring anything. You stated his name first so it is your obligation to defend your position. You hid behind his name and when presented with contradictory evidence
  13. I am pretty sure you have read it. He stopped responding and did not address my single question. Instead he started citing his favorite stories from charittars in a shameful manner. A Sikh posts his favorite sakhi. Funny, as I have not seen it myself. I do not know anyone from RSS. You must be on their guest list as you receive their program agenda. Do you have any facts or just hypothesis? Comment on the post and stick to the topic. Present evidence that Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha twisted facts in his book. I posted direct quote from Gurmat Martand. Also see an article by a missionar
  14. Here is what Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha writes in Gurmat Martand part 2 on page 567 ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ-ਲੋਕ ਪ੍ਰਸਿੱਧ ਦਸਵੇਂ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹ ਦਾ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ, ਜਿਸਦਾ ਸੰਖੇਪ ਨਾਮ ਦਸਮ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਹੈ, ਉਸਦੀ ਅਸਲਿਯਤ ਇਹ ਹੈ-ਕਾਵਯ ਪ੍ਰਿਅ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਸਾਹਿਬ, ਸ਼ਾਂਤ ਵੀਰ ਰਸ ਆਦਿਕ ਰਸ ਪੂਰਤ ਮਨੋਹਰ ਰਚਨਾ ਆਪ ਲਿਖਦੇ ਅਤੇ ਆਪਣੇ ਦਰਬਾਰੀ 52 ਕਵੀਆਂ ਤੋਂ ਨਿਰੰਤਰ ਲਿਖਵਾਇਆਂ ਕਰਦੇ ਸਨ…ਸੰਮਤ 1778 ਵਿਚ ਮਾਤਾ ਸੁੰਦਰੀ ਜੀ ਨੇ ਭਾਈ ਮਨੀ ਸਿੰਘ ਨੂੰ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤਸਰ ਦੇ ਦਰਬਾਰ ਹਰਿਮੰਦਰ ਦਾ ਗ੍ਰੰਥੀ ਥਾਪਿਆ, ਭਾਈ ਸਾਹਿਬ ਨੇ ਇਹ ਸੇਵਾ ਉਤਮ ਰੀਤਿ ਨਾਲ ਨਿਭਾਹੀ ਅਰ ਇਸ ਸਮੇ ਕਈ ਪੁਸਤਕ ਲਿਖੇ…ਇਸਤੋਂ ਭਿੰਨ ਇਕ ਦਸਵੇਂ ਪਾਤਸ਼ਾਹੀ ਦਾ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਲਿਖਿਆ, ਜਿਸ ਵਿਚ ਵਿਦਿਆ ਸਾਗਰ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਦੇ ਕੁਛ ਭਾਗ,ਜੋ ਯਤਨ ਕਰਕੇ ਸਿੱਖਾਂ ਅਤੇ ਕਵੀਆਂ ਤੋਂ ਹੱਥ
  15. Bhai Kanh Singh Nabha says cleary in Mahan Kosh under the entry for this 'rehitnama' that this was not written by Bhai Mani Singh and that Guru Gobind Singh would not have given such hukams. Please see Mahan Kosh for the entire entry. Macleod also agrees that this does not seem authentic.
  • Create New...