SikhKhoj Posted July 22, 2011 Report Share Posted July 22, 2011 (edited) I was discussing with Amardeep. It is easier to discuss in a thread. What do others think? Amardeep, start with posting all your arguments (we start from nill here). Topic: 1. do all religions lead to God? 2. are other religions false/contain mistakes? Edited July 22, 2011 by SikhKhoj 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted July 22, 2011 Report Share Posted July 22, 2011 As I said, go read up on vedant.. Im not gonna discuss this with you when you keep refusing to see the greater picture and instead just post random quotes from non-authority hindu scriptures nor have an interest in understanding basic vedant. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted July 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2011 What is authority Hindu granth? Name me which ones. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kdsingh80 Posted July 22, 2011 Report Share Posted July 22, 2011 I was discussing with Amardeep. It is easier to discuss in a thread. What do others think? Amardeep, start with posting all your arguments (we start from nill here). Topic: 1. do all religions lead to God? 2. are other religions false/contain mistakes? My answer is No If all Religions really lead to god then why was Sikhi created in First place.the creation of Sikhism itself shows that Guru's believed that the best way to acheive salvation is Sikhi 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted July 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2011 (edited) If all Religions really lead to god then why was Sikhi created in First place.the creation of Sikhism itself shows that Guru's believed that the best way to acheive salvation is Sikhi Exactly my point to Amardeep. If Hinduism was alright, Guru would have preached Hinduism. But no they created a different religion. Edited July 22, 2011 by SikhKhoj 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted July 22, 2011 Report Share Posted July 22, 2011 read this http://www.sikhawareness.com/index.php/topic/14015-advaita-vedanta/page__p__122717__hl__vedanta__fromsearch__1#entry122717 and afterwards read this by Tsingh on why sikhi then: http://www.sikhawareness.com/index.php/topic/9158-the-role-of-avatar-in-traditional-sikh-metaphsyics/ 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted July 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2011 Quote relevant parts here. All other religions have mistakes, how would you explain that? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted July 22, 2011 Report Share Posted July 22, 2011 No read it all.. If you dont even care to read a simple text then what is the point in debating with you? YOu debate to learn or just for the sake of debating? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted July 22, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 22, 2011 (edited) They don't give an article to read in a debate, they quote relevant points. But I read it. Now tell me how you would justifiy wrong things in other religions? Edited July 22, 2011 by SikhKhoj 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted July 23, 2011 Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 Now you gonna go on and on again about sati and caste system? I already told you to stop regarding current practices in the hindu community as a touch stone for how to interpret the caste system as laid out in the vedic canon.. The puranas nor the manu samritee is NOT a part of the vedantic canon.. that is only: Vedas, upanishads, forrest litterature and the brahmanas. Just quoting a few lines from here and there because the label "hindu" is attached to the scripture is like trying to argue that sikhs believe in the caste system by refferencing the various rehitnamas.. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted July 23, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 Why do you assume that 'other religions' only refers to Hinduism? I am talking about Christianity, Islam etc aswel. If you don't want quots from the Puranas or the Manu Smritees then fine, I shall quote from the Vedas. Puranas are mostly basic 'interpretations/teachings' of the Vedas, and are also important to the Hindus. Vedas promote having boys over girls. It even lays out a ceremony to be carried out by the pregnant women to beget a son. Atharva Ved, Book 6, Hymn 11. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osingh1 Posted July 23, 2011 Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 (edited) Religion may lead one closer to God. But each religion has a different destination. Before Guru Nanak Dev ji Maharaj, bhagats such bhagat kabir ji, bhagat Ramanand ji had reached as far as karam khand. When Guru Nanak Dev ji gave them gurmantar, they were able to reach the highest khand which is Sachkhand and were able to uchaar Dhur ki bani. No other religion mentions Sachkhand, so how can they reach Sachkhand? Muslims aim for jannah, christians aim for heavan. If one is aiming for heavan or jannah how can he reach Sachkhand?Just read description of Jannah in the Quran. Here one recieved wine that does not intoxicate, beatiful gardens etc. Now read sri Jap ji sahib, Saram khand which is the next level up from Gyan Khand cannot even be decribed. Here the the surat and man are changed. In this body we have we can't fully appreciate Saram khand. If one tries to describe this khand he later regrets, such is the beauty of this khand. If we can't even describe Saram khand imagine the greatness of Karam khand and finally Sachkhand. I respect muslims, christians, hindu's etc who strive for mukhti, salvation, heaven etc. Can we at least agree that destination of Gursikhs differs to that of semitic religions, please read their decription of heaven in their respective granths. Jannah is mentioned many times in the Quran. I agree that Hindu dharam is closest to Sikhi when it comes to upper most destination. I truly believe sri Guru Nanak Dev ji maharaj is the highest avtar (please read bhatta de swaiye) then Satguru alone can guide us to the highest destination. Avtars such as Krishan ji, sri Raam Chander ji were not pooran avtars. Sabb te vadda Satgur Nanak, jin kal rakhi meri. rabb rakhe Edited July 23, 2011 by osingh1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted July 23, 2011 Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 SK: your methodology makes no sense.. IF you wish to prove that Sikhism does'nt believe all paths can lead to God if followed properly then quote Gurbani instead of picking random lines from various scriptures. Its like saying, Peter does not like Martin because Martin says bla bla bla.. why not directly just ask peter if he likes martin instead of trying to put arguments down his throat?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithar Posted July 23, 2011 Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 SK: your methodology makes no sense.. IF you wish to prove that Sikhism does'nt believe all paths can lead to God if followed properly then quote Gurbani instead of picking random lines from various scriptures. Its like saying, Peter does not like Martin because Martin says bla bla bla.. why not directly just ask peter if he likes martin instead of trying to put arguments down his throat?? You don't need to even look at Peter to know that Martin is imperfect. What happens if Martin happens to beleive in the oppressive caste system, idol worship OR is an old pedophile who married a 6 year girl, promotes rape and execution of unarmed combatants/civilians, believes in slavery etc do we still need to ask if Martin is equal to Peter? If Sikhs do not abandon Dasam Bani, and read it they can clearly see the greatness (and distinctness) of Gurmat over all other matts, which is why certain agencies have planted the Kala Afghani movement amongst the Sikhs to discard Dasam Bani. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted July 23, 2011 Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 I can't seem to find the quote you are talking about but that veda seem to talk much about kingship so isn't it possible that the ceremony is to have a successor king in the linage and not as you point out, - to have a son because women are inferior and should be below men... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted July 23, 2011 Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 Idol worship is not promoted in vedant, the caste system laid out in vedant is also not that which we find today nor in the manu simritee (which holds no authority among brahmins. its simply hindu litterature like we have the rehitnamas as sikh litterature). the original caste system was just an organisation of society into people becomming experts in their various fields. The Gita suggest if i remember correctly that it was possible for people in the original varnasharama to change caste, meaning it was not as rigid as it is today. Gurbani mentions dhroo prahlad etc to be gurmukhs, how does that make sense when Guru Nanak only took birth in 1469? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted July 23, 2011 Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 (edited) Bhai Gurdaas is clear: ਸਰੈ ਸਰੀਅਤ ਆਖੀਐ ਤਰਕ ਤਰੀਕਤ ਰਾਹ ਸਿਞਾਣੇ। Many are there who give exposition to the Muslim code of conduct (shariat) and many go on debating on the basis of tariqat, the methods of spiritual purification. ਮਾਰਫਤੀ ਮਾਰੂਫ ਲਖ ਹਕ ਹਕੀਕਤ ਹੁਕਮਿ ਸਮਾਣੇ। Myriad people have become famous by reaching the last stage of knowledge, the marfati and many in His divine Will have merged into the haqiqat, the truth. Fanaa or Haqiqat is the destruction of the ego and merging with Allah in Sufism... Edited July 23, 2011 by amardeep 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osingh1 Posted July 23, 2011 Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 (edited) 'Gurbani mentions dhroo prahlad etc to be gurmukhs, how does that make sense when Guru Nanak only took birth in 1469?' Guru Nanak Dev ji Maharaj has been existence before 1469. Guru Nanak dev ji is the guru-form of Waheguru, therefore he has been existence since aad, right from the beginning. Again Guru Nanak dev ji is 'sabb te vadda', none other than Sri Guru Arjan dev ji says this. Now at this present time Guru Granth Sahib is Guru in this age of Kaljug. As bhramgiani bhai sahib bhai Gurdas ji states: ਕਲਿ ਤਾਰਣ ਗੁਰੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਆਇਆ Guru Nanak came to redeem kaljug ਬਾਬਾ ਪੈਧਾ ਸਚਖੰਡਿ ਨਉ ਨਿਧਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਗਰੀਬੀ ਪਾਈ Baba reached the region of truth wherefrom he received Nam, the storehouse of nine treasures and humility. Guru Nanak recieved naam from Sachkhand. What more is there to say. Tell me which other avtar, prophet received naam from sachkhand. Dhan Dhan Guru Nanak Dev ji! We do not need any other religion to guide us to Sachkhand the highest spritual abode. In the end Satguru Nanak has shown us the path to Sachkhand. May Guru Sahib to do kirpa and bless this insect with Gurmat Naam. Maharaj mehar karan (I make a benti that when discussing these topics lets refrain from attacking religions or attacking each other. These are the debates we should be having. Even though we might disagree with each other I still respect memebers on this forum. In the end we all have love for Guru Nanak Dev ji, we can all agree on this.) Edited July 23, 2011 by osingh1 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bundha Posted July 23, 2011 Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 In Bachittar Natak Sahib, Guru Gobind Singh Ji says quite clearly that AkaalPurkh sent many souls to this earth to show the people the correct way but all of them did not show the correct way, each one changed the message. Some smeared ash over their bodies, some wore wooden earrings, some started to proclaim that they were the true way , some started circumcision and set themselves up as king of arabia, all changed the true path according to their own minds, which is the reason why Guru Nanak Dev Ji came to this world. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amardeep Posted July 23, 2011 Report Share Posted July 23, 2011 That is interesting, which form did Guru Nanak take then when he gave guidance to the likes of Dhroo, Prahlad etc?? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
osingh1 Posted July 24, 2011 Report Share Posted July 24, 2011 I think Guru Maharaj was the shakti behind previous avtars. For example when Dropadi/Panchali's honour was saved when Dushasana under the orders from his brother, Duryodhna attempted to remove all of her clothes. Her honour was saved, they couldn't remove all of her clothes. According to Mahabharata it was sri Krishan that saved Dropadi, but according to Gurbani it was Guru jyoti - Guru form, that saved her honour. Guru maharaj worked through sri Krishan ji or directly to save her Dropadi's honour. Sri Raam ji and Sri Krishan ji however are not pooran avtars and made mistakes. Just reading bhatta de swaiye one realises the greatness of Guru Sahiban. As bhai Gurdas ji states it is sri Satguru Baba Nanak ji that has come in kaljug to guide bhagats to salvation. Also I think it is relevant to mention that Dropadi did receive udhaar, mukhti in the sense that her honour was saved. This doesn't mean she was delivered into Sachkhand. There are many levels of udhaar, maybe one gives up drugs and alcohol through abhiyaas of naam and baani, this is one type of udhaar. When sri Prahlaad was saved from his father, when sri Kabir ji was saved from drowning etc There are different levels of udhaar. The highest udhaar is to reach Sachkhand. I have no doubt that sri Prahlad and sri Dhroo are residing in Sachkhand. Many rishis, sufis, sadhus etc may have been reborn and recieved khande de pahul or charan amrit from Guru Sahiban and in this way reached Sachkhand. Also Guru Sahib may have also given naam to bhagats prior to 1469 in gupt form. However now we know for sure that Guru Nanak has come in Kaljug. Bhai Gurdas ji has clearly stated that Guru Nanak dev ji recieved naam directly from Akal Purakh in Sachkhand, look at my previous post. Again, I ask the question which other prophet or avtaar recieved this honour? May Guru Sahib bless this insect and fellow forum members with Gurmat Naam. Rabb Rakhe 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SURYADEV Posted July 24, 2011 Report Share Posted July 24, 2011 Sri Raam ji and Sri Krishan ji however are not pooran avtars and made mistakes. I dont think that you can say that Sri Ram and Krishna Ji were not pooran avtar. It is said that in the 4 yugs, they were pooran avatars for their respective yugs. Dare I say at the same level as Guru Nanak Dev Ji is for Kalyug. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mithar Posted July 24, 2011 Report Share Posted July 24, 2011 I dont think that you can say that Sri Ram and Krishna Ji were not pooran avtar. It is said that in the 4 yugs, they were pooran avatars for their respective yugs. Dare I say at the same level as Guru Nanak Dev Ji is for Kalyug. Not according to Sri Dasam Granth. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted July 24, 2011 Report Share Posted July 24, 2011 Issue of ram and krishan being pooran avtar or not is being discussed until death..please refer to recording and discussion with sant jagjit singh ji harkhowale under stickies section. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SikhKhoj Posted July 24, 2011 Author Report Share Posted July 24, 2011 (edited) IF you wish to prove that Sikhism does'nt believe all paths can lead to God if followed properly then quote Gurbani instead of picking random lines from various scriptures. Its like saying, Peter does not like Martin because Martin says bla bla bla.. why not directly just ask peter if he likes martin instead of trying to put arguments down his throat?? Amardeep, Your argument isn't solid. If Sikhi says it rejects gender discrimination, and another religion 'approves' it in some way or other, then it is clear Sikhi also rejects beliefs which allow things which are against Gurmat. Besides, as Mithar said, you don't even need to look at Peter to know Martin is wrong. Still I shall provide some Tuks from Gurbani: 1. Vedas are incomplete ਚਾਰੇ ਬੇਦ ਕਥਹਿ ਆਕਾਰੁ ॥ ਤੀਨਿ ਅਵਸਥਾ ਕਹਹਿ ਵਖਿਆਨੁ ॥ ਤੁਰੀਆਵਸਥਾ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਤੇ ਹਰਿ ਜਾਨੁ ॥੧॥ The four Vedas speak only of the visible forms. They describe and explain the three states of mind, but the fourth state, union with the Lord, is known only through the True Guru. ||1|| ਅਸਟ ਦਸੀ ਚਹੁ ਭੇਦੁ ਨ ਪਾਇਆ ॥ The eighteen Puraanas and the four Vedas do not know His mystery. ਹਰਿ ਨਿਗਮ ਲਹਹਿ ਨ ਭੇਵ ॥ The Vedas do not know the Mystery of the Lord. 2. Rejecting Hindu and Islamic writings ਪੰਡਿਤ ਮੁਲਾਂ ਛਾਡੇ ਦੋਊ ਪੰਡਿਤ ਮੁਲਾਂ ਜੋ ਲਿਖਿ ਦੀਆ ॥ ਛਾਡਿ ਚਲੇ ਹਮ ਕਛੂ ਨ ਲੀਆ ॥੩॥ 3. Greatness of our Guru Granth/Gurbaani ਪਹਿਲਾ ਆਗਮੁ ਨਿਗਮੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਆਖਿ ਸੁਣਾਏ ਪੂਰੇ ਗੁਰ ਕਾ ਬਚਨੁ ਉਪਰਿ ਆਇਆ ॥ People used to chant and recite the Shaastras and the Vedas, O Nanak, but now the Words of the Perfect Guru have come to be the most exalted of all. ਪੋਥੀ ਪਰਮੇਸਰ ਕਾ ਥਾਨੁ ॥ This Holy Book is the home of the Transcendent Lord God. Bani Guru Guru Hai Bani Vich Bani Amrit Saarey Waho Waho Bani Nirankar Hai Tis Jevad Avar Na Koe I can't seem to find the quote you are talking about but that veda seem to talk much about kingship so isn't it possible that the ceremony is to have a successor king in the linage and not as you point out, - to have a son because women are inferior and should be below men... HYMN XI An epithalamian charm to ensure the birth of a boy 1 Asvattha on the Sami-tree. There a male birth is certified. There is the finding of a son: this bring we to the women-folk. 2 The father sows the genial seed, the woman tends and fosters it. This is the finding of a son: thus hath Prajāpati declared. 3 Prajāpati, Anumati, Sinivāli have ordered it. Elsewhere may he effect the birth of maids, but here (womb) prepare a boy. link: http://www.sacred-texts.com/hin/av/av06011.htm Nowhere does it say that it is to ensure a male succesor, it is something general. Gurbani mentions dhroo prahlad etc to be gurmukhs, how does that make sense when Guru Nanak only took birth in 1469? Nowhere in Gurbani does it say that these persons became one with Waheguru by reciting Vedas, Quran or being Hindu/Muslims. Another point to note is that Gurbani unites under 1 idea. Meaning all contributors agreed with tuks like Hindu Anna Turku Kaana and Na Hum Hindu Na Musalmaan. Bhagats who met Guru Nanak became Sikhs. Even if you or others might say that they did not meet, we can surely agree that they were not Hindu or Muslim as can be seen from Gurbani. Dhru and Prehlad were Gurmukhs who meditated on naam. Some Sikh traditions suggest Guru Nanak Ji gave them naam themselves, altough I have no comment on that. Edited July 24, 2011 by SikhKhoj 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.