Jump to content

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, Kira said:

I've asked you to explain to me how someone can be a Sikh of Guru Nanak but also call him a false prophet, how someone can consider the Quran the sole authority of God but also say that Gurbani is the same lmao. Rather than posting 1 sentence answers, maybe explain it a bit? 

Well for a start it would be difficult for Baba farid ji to call guru nanak dev ji a false prophet since he lived about 300 years before him but rather don't you think it's important that guru sahibs did not call him a apostate? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Kira said:

My logic is fine. If you think you can recite the oath to Muhammad and still be a Sikh then please explain to me how? The very oath says any other religion is false..by reciting it you say Sikhism and Guru Nanak Dev Ji are false. So tell me how someone can be a Sikh of Guru Nanak and a follower of Muhammad. Tell me how a reciter of the Quran which considers itself the ONLY authority from God also sit there and say Gurbani is the same. That's called Blasphemy is Islam. So no. try again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Sukhvirk1976 said:

Do I really need to explain.. Try mool mantar.. I mean this is a Sikh forum.. Have you heard of it? 

That alone speaks volumes of your laziness, the argument that God is beyond Duality can be applied to everything and anyone. The fake Babas that roam India can use the same argument "I can be a Sikh of Guru Nanak Dev and also go to these people" The Aztecs sacrificed humans to gods "oh its ok God is beyond Duality, I can be a Sikh as well" Do you get the small flaw? 

I asked you and I'll repeat since it seems forming cohesive thoughts is something you dislike. How can someone who sits there reciting the Quran, reciting the Kalima and then say "I'm a Sikh"  still be both a muslim and a Sikh. You can't swear oaths to 2 sovereigns and say you belong to both. 

9 minutes ago, Sukhvirk1976 said:

Well for a start it would be difficult for Baba farid ji to call guru nanak dev ji a false prophet since he lived about 300 years before him but rather don't you think it's important that guru sahibs did not call him a apostate? 

We just established he wasn't a Muslim, you even admitted it. If Farid Ji was a muslim at the start of his life (most likely yes) then yes he did believe anyone after Muhammed would be an apostate. However Farid Ji changed and became enlightened so obviously he would no longer be restricted by that narrow myopic viewpoint.  The end game was He ended up one with God through Gurbani (a small portion of it).

 

Obviously he didn't. That twisted logic is like saying when people joined Guru Nanak Dev Ji and became Sikhs, we should still consider them Hindus/Muslims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Kira said:

That alone speaks volumes of your laziness, the argument that God is beyond Duality can be applied to everything and anyone. The fake Babas that roam India can use the same argument "I can be a Sikh of Guru Nanak Dev and also go to these people" The Aztecs sacrificed humans to gods "oh its ok God is beyond Duality, I can be a Sikh as well" Do you get the small flaw? 

I asked you and I'll repeat since it seems forming cohesive thoughts is something you dislike. How can someone who sits there reciting the Quran, reciting the Kalima and then say "I'm a Sikh"  still be both a muslim and a Sikh. You can't swear oaths to 2 sovereigns and say you belong to both. 

We just established he wasn't a Muslim, you even admitted it. If Farid Ji was a muslim at the start of his life (most likely yes) then yes he did believe anyone after Muhammed would be an apostate. However Farid Ji changed and became enlightened so obviously he would no longer be restricted by that narrow myopic viewpoint. Obviously he didn't. That twisted logic is like saying when people joined Guru Nanak Dev Ji and became Sikhs, we should still consider them Hindus/Muslims.

Oh dear.. Nuff said 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, Kira said:

That alone speaks volumes of your laziness, the argument that God is beyond Duality can be applied to everything and anyone. The fake Babas that roam India can use the same argument "I can be a Sikh of Guru Nanak Dev and also go to these people" The Aztecs sacrificed humans to gods "oh its ok God is beyond Duality, I can be a Sikh as well" Do you get the small flaw? 

I asked you and I'll repeat since it seems forming cohesive thoughts is something you dislike. How can someone who sits there reciting the Quran, reciting the Kalima and then say "I'm a Sikh"  still be both a muslim and a Sikh. You can't swear oaths to 2 sovereigns and say you belong to both. 

We just established he wasn't a Muslim, you even admitted it. If Farid Ji was a muslim at the start of his life (most likely yes) then yes he did believe anyone after Muhammed would be an apostate. However Farid Ji changed and became enlightened so obviously he would no longer be restricted by that narrow myopic viewpoint.  The end game was He ended up one with God through Gurbani (a small portion of it).

 

Obviously he didn't. That twisted logic is like saying when people joined Guru Nanak Dev Ji and became Sikhs, we should still consider them Hindus/Muslims.

 

He who swears to me on the Koran
Ought not to have killed or imprisoned my men. 

Guru gobind Singh ji clearly respected those of true faith 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Preeet said:

Vaheguru ji Ka Khalsa
Vaheguru ji Ki Fateh ji

I think that our Sri Guru Sahib ji`s are above the titles of ``prophethood``.. For instance, I`ve heard Muslims say that even Muhhamad ji has made mistakes, and yet is a prophet.. So by that logic I think calling my Satguru ji a ``prophet`` would be considered odd because Satguru jis do not make mistakes.

Satgurus always were clear that they were not prophets, that it was revelation through gian.. They lived amongst us just as SGGS ji does today 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Sukhvirk1976 said:

 

He who swears to me on the Koran
Ought not to have killed or imprisoned my men. 

Guru gobind Singh ji clearly respected those of true faith 

There's a difference between respect and thinking its right. Guru Gobind Singh Ji respected various Hindus and Muslims, that suddenly didn't make him say that someone could be a Sikh and a Muslim/Hindu at the same time. That quote is about anyone who takes false oaths, Guru Sahib told his Sikhs not to trust anyone like that anyways. 

 

So once again I've asked you to provide a logical way in how someone can adhere to Islam but also be a follower of Guru Nanak Dev Ji How can someone proclaim the Quran is the only revelation of God but also then turn around and say "yup Gurbani is the same too" 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Kira said:

There's a difference between respect and thinking its right. Guru Gobind Singh Ji respected various Hindus and Muslims, that suddenly didn't make him say that someone could be a Sikh and a Muslim at the same time. That quote is about anyone who takes false oaths, Guru Sahib told his Sikhs not to trust anyone like that anyways. 

 

So once again I've asked you to provide a logical way in how someone can adhere to Islam but also be a follower of Guru Nanak Dev Ji How can someone proclaim the Quran is the only revelation of God but also then turn around and say "yup Gurbani is the same too" 

 

If guru nanak dev ji could wear a chadar with inscriptions of the Quran yet also chastise those who abused the authority of the Quran for there own means... If you believe akaal is one (which as someone who proclaims to be a Sikh) it's very easy to move beyond the politics of religion... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Kira said:

There's a difference between respect and thinking its right. Guru Gobind Singh Ji respected various Hindus and Muslims, that suddenly didn't make him say that someone could be a Sikh and a Muslim at the same time. That quote is about anyone who takes false oaths, Guru Sahib told his Sikhs not to trust anyone like that anyways. 

 

So once again I've asked you to provide a logical way in how someone can adhere to Islam but also be a follower of Guru Nanak Dev Ji How can someone proclaim the Quran is the only revelation of God but also then turn around and say "yup Gurbani is the same too" 

 

Someone who is a true Muslim, true Christian, true 'sikh' doesn't get lost in communalism 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use