Kira

Has anyone here read the Quran

115 posts in this topic

2 minutes ago, Ranjeet01 said:

In bani, our Gurus talk about the muslim not really about Islam or the prophet in particular. 

At least that is how I see it.

They do talk about him in Bachitar Natak. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MisterrSingh said:

In recent times my mind constantly returns to one question regarding Islam and our Guru Sahibs: if the Qur'an and its teachings are as their scriptures show them to be, why were our Guru Sahibs not unequivocal in their condemnation of the religion, its Prophet, and its teachings? How can the authors of our Bani possibly be so forgiving of the content of the Qur'an? I don't get it at all.

"Bed kateb kaho mat jhootey. Jhoota jo na beecharey" ~ SGGS

(Do not say that the vedas or semitic books are false . False are those who don't comprehend their essence)

 

Quran is one of those books , like uranium ! You can use it to run electricity plants or make it into atom bombs ! 

Unfortunately for this holy book, it landed amidst a bunch of buffoons ! Who didn't apprehend the underlying essence of it 

 

Who's kaafir ? they say its non muslims. Actually its those humans of any religion who refuse to thank god and are ungrateful. They say "Islam is the only religion acceptable to allah". True that, Islam (submission to will of god) is only religion acceptable to god . Its just that islam can be sikhi or hindu or buddhist too ! 

When you interpret these scriptures and saying in a metaphorical and subtle way, the beauty emerges ! and extremism fades into thin air ! 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

Yes, i appreciate that aspect of it; it's all about the iambic metres and things of that nature, and how those linguistic measures evoke certain emotions and sensations beyond the process of simple reading and comprehension, isn't it?

I don't know what it is. I don't even want to analyse it, or use reductionist techniques against it. When I'm lucky, I get to feel it. End of. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, MisterrSingh said:

Yes, i appreciate that aspect of it; it's all about the iambic metres and things of that nature, and how those linguistic measures evoke certain emotions and sensations beyond the process of simple reading and comprehension, isn't it?

Guru Sahiban would not have commented on the quran as such because the quran was not the same as it is now , also the hadiths were ascribed to Mohammed many years after his death ; in that case anyone can say anything and say the prophet said it , I mean the sayings had to be sifted for the final published ones out of many thousands 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I havent read the quran. But if I did, i think i would really connect with it. Its the only other scripture besides sggs i think that goes into raptures about God. And arabic sounds beautiful. Reminds me of jaap sahib. The parts ajeetsingh quoted read likea beautiful eulogy to God. But i probably couldn't stomach the extensive rules on slaughtering and marital matters. The hadiths from wht ive seen are crazy. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

When you interpret these scriptures and saying in a metaphorical and subtle way, the beauty emerges ! and extremism fades into thin air ! 

“I saw the prophet – pbuh – sucking on the tongue or the lips of Al-Hassan son of Ali, may the prayers of Allah be upon him. For no tongue or lips that the prophet sucked on will be tormented (by hell fire)

He (the Prophet) lift up his (al Hassan’s) shirt and kissed his (little) <banned word filter activated>..”
روى أنه صلى الله عليه و سلم قبل زبيبة الحسن أو الحسين
He (the prophet) kissed the (little) <banned word filter activated> of al Hassan or al Husein
رأيت النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم فرج ما بين فخذي الحسين و قبل زبيبته
He (the prophet) put Husein’s legs apart and kissed his (little) <banned word filter activated>

Another Hadith. Majma al-Zawa’id, Ali ibn Abu Bakr al-Haythami, 299/9 مجمع الزوائد لعلي بن أبى بكر الهيثمي

رأيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم فرج ما بين فخذي الحسين و قبل زبيبته
رواه الطبراني و إسناده حسن
translated into English: “I saw the Messenger of Allah pbuh putting Husein’s legs apart and kissing his (little) <banned word filter activated>.”

 

You're chatting nonsense. Show me the beauty in any of the above.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

“I saw the prophet – pbuh – sucking on the tongue or the lips of Al-Hassan son of Ali, may the prayers of Allah be upon him. For no tongue or lips that the prophet sucked on will be tormented (by hell fire)

He (the Prophet) lift up his (al Hassan’s) shirt and kissed his (little) <banned word filter activated>..”
روى أنه صلى الله عليه و سلم قبل زبيبة الحسن أو الحسين
He (the prophet) kissed the (little) <banned word filter activated> of al Hassan or al Husein
رأيت النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم فرج ما بين فخذي الحسين و قبل زبيبته
He (the prophet) put Husein’s legs apart and kissed his (little) <banned word filter activated>

Another Hadith. Majma al-Zawa’id, Ali ibn Abu Bakr al-Haythami, 299/9 مجمع الزوائد لعلي بن أبى بكر الهيثمي

رأيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم فرج ما بين فخذي الحسين و قبل زبيبته
رواه الطبراني و إسناده حسن
translated into English: “I saw the Messenger of Allah pbuh putting Husein’s legs apart and kissing his (little) <banned word filter activated>.”

 

You're chatting nonsense. Show me the beauty in any of the above.

Hadisey are controversial ! Quran is not same as hadiths . Gurbani says nothing on hadiths . 

Hadiths are just life accounts of Muhammad by his contemporaries or so they say. Barbaric things of islam like circumcision etc are found in hadiths only, not quran ! 

Also , I am no apologist for islam. I am just saying our Guru sahib said "Bed kateb kaho mat jhootey, jhoota jo na beecharey"

Edited by AjeetSinghPunjabi
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

Guru Sahiban would not have commented on the quran as such because the quran was not the same as it is now , also the hadiths were ascribed to Mohammed many years after his death ; in that case anyone can say anything and say the prophet said it , I mean the sayings had to be sifted for the final published ones out of many thousands 

The Qur'an immediately post Mohammed's death and the versions edited thereafter may have differed in content, but i struggle to believe they were still revising and editing the essence of it a mere 300 or so years ago. Surely it would've been in a finalised form by the year 1700?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

Hadisey are controversial ! Quran is not same as hadiths . Gurbani says nothing on hadiths . 

Hadiths are just life accounts of Muhammad by his contemporaries or so they say. Barbaric things of islam like circumcision etc are found in hadiths only, not quran ! 

Also , I am no apologist for islam. I am just saying our Guru sahib said "Bed kateb kaho mat jhootey, jhoota jo na beecharey"

Don't make me search for similar content in the Quran itself, lol. It won't be pretty. Btw, you said "scriptures" not solely the Qur'an, so the Hadith is covered by the term "scriptures."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

The Qur'an immediately post Mohammed's death and the versions edited thereafter may have differed in content, but i struggle to believe they were still revising and editing the essence of it a mere 300 or so years ago. Surely it would've been in a finalised form by the year 1700?

There is also the versions of islam , one that Mohammeds family had championed and then the one that their (the family's) would-be assassin's created. Allah in the quran is so not detached, but seems gleeful at hurting or confusing the lost instead of loving and forgiving 

Edited by jkvlondon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, jkvlondon said:

There is also the versions of islam , one that Mohammeds family had championed and then the one that their would-be assassin's created. Allah in the quran is so not detached, but seems gleeful at hurting or confusing the lost instead of loving and forgiving 

I'll have to read up on all this. I know that Mohammed's assassin was apparently a Jewish woman whose family he'd previously slain, so unless Jews had their hands in creating a version of the Qur'an, I'm getting confused.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

Don't make me search for similar content in the Quran itself, lol. It won't be pretty. Btw, you said "scriptures" not solely the Qur'an, so the Hadith is covered by the term "scriptures."

NO ! Hadith is not scripture , the same way that sikh historian book is not a scripture for us 

There are 4 scriptures of east (4 vedas), and 4 of west (Quran, Bible , Avestha and Torah) . Even Gurbani mentions these as "CHAAR" . So there are chaar ved , chaar kateb ! 

 

Quran is not comprehensive as SGGS is ! Its not as great either . I am just saying that it can give you a person direction to spiritual life if they handle it well . I know it has verses which say life of this dunia is temporary delusion . Same concept as "jag is maya" . It introduces in a person unattachment of this worldly life, "bairaag" I might say. 

Ofcourse, only if someone skipped madrasa and kept aside the criminal law verses (chopping hands, heads, etc lol) which I believe were delivered in the first place because arabs were quite bewakoof kind of people. They had to be guided .

Also Muhammad got revelation from outside (angel gabriel), not from inside , as in case of Guru sahib. which leads me to believe that prophet Muhammad was of not a very high spiritual state. no offense

Edited by AjeetSinghPunjabi
1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can say a lot about muhammad here . But I am not going to , because I don't think I have that kind of kamaai to lambast a religious leader, even though he was quite controversial . And I don't want PAAP on my head, incase i m wrong lol

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

NO ! Hadith is not scripture , the same way that sikh historian book is not a scripture for us 

There are 4 scriptures of east (4 vedas), and 4 of west (Quran, Bible , Avestha and Torah) . Even Gurbani mentions these as "CHAAR" . So there are chaar ved , chaar kateb ! 

 

Quran is not comprehensive as SGGS is ! Its not as great either . I am just saying that it can give you a person direction to spiritual life if they handle it well . I know it has verses which say life of this dunia is temporary delusion . Same concept as "jag is maya" . It introduces in a person unattachment of this worldly life, "bairaag" I might say. 

Ofcourse, only if someone skipped madrasa and kept aside the criminal law verses (chopping hands, heads, etc lol) which I believe were delivered in the first place because arabs were quite bewakoof kind of people. They had to be guided .

Also Muhammad got revelation from outside (angel gabriel), not from inside , as in case of Guru sahib. which leads me to believe that prophet Muhammad was of not a very high spiritual state. no offense

Well, I'll have a better handle of these issues once I've read it.

Plus, don't use exclamation marks and bold entire paragraphs when conversing with people on forums. It denotes shouting, and it makes you seem like a pendu.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

"Bed kateb kaho mat jhootey. Jhoota jo na beecharey" ~ SGGS

(Do not say that the vedas or semitic books are false . False are those who don't comprehend their essence)

 

Quran is one of those books , like uranium ! You can use it to run electricity plants or make it into atom bombs ! 

Unfortunately for this holy book, it landed amidst a bunch of buffoons ! Who didn't apprehend the underlying essence of it 

 

Who's kaafir ? they say its non muslims. Actually its those humans of any religion who refuse to thank god and are ungrateful. They say "Islam is the only religion acceptable to allah". True that, Islam (submission to will of god) is only religion acceptable to god . Its just that islam can be sikhi or hindu or buddhist too ! 

When you interpret these scriptures and saying in a metaphorical and subtle way, the beauty emerges ! and extremism fades into thin air ! 

Have you read the rest of the Shabad by Bhagat Kabirji? You are no different to those you accuse of not understanding the underlying essence of the scriptures. Please read the rest of the Shabad where Bhagat kabirji criticises halal slaughter, ritual cleansing etc. Btw the Shabad has always been read along with the Sakhi where Bhagat Kabirji criticises those who dismiss other's scriptures without having contemplated them. So there is nothing wrong on stating they do not make sense once you have read them.

Your understanding of Kafir is what the Muslims want non-Muslims in the west to believe until they are able to become a majority and then you will understand what they really mean by kafir. Mohammed killed and threw out all the Jews and Christians out of Arabia. So were all these Jews and Christians ones who refused to thank god and were ungrateful??

Stop playing word games. Islam means submission to the will of Allah not belief in Gods other than Allah. Lets play your wold game further, I know since every person alive in this world is learning something each and every day then that makes them Sikhs! So who says Sikhs are only 25 million, we Sikhs are now 6 Billion! 

Edited by proactive
2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

I'll have to read up on all this. I know that Mohammed's assassin was apparently a Jewish woman whose family he'd previously slain, so unless Jews had their hands in creating a version of the Qur'an, I'm getting confused.

meant those muslims who tried to kill the prophet's family after he got poisoned by the Jewish slave 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
54 minutes ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

Alhamdulillah RABBI al aalameen 

(Praise be to the lord (rabb) of the worlds ) . Interestingly Punjabi word "rabb" is here ! 

You got it the wrong way round. The term rabh actually comes from Islam, Panjabis adopted it. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

I can say a lot about muhammad here . But I am not going to , because I don't think I have that kind of kamaai to lambast a religious leader, even though he was quite controversial . And I don't want PAAP on my head, incase i m wrong lol

Nobody is lambasting or even criticising Mohammed. We're trying to grasp a complex religious situation from the pov of non-Muslims, and we can only go on what their writings say.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

“I saw the prophet – pbuh – sucking on the tongue or the lips of Al-Hassan son of Ali, may the prayers of Allah be upon him. For no tongue or lips that the prophet sucked on will be tormented (by hell fire)

He (the Prophet) lift up his (al Hassan’s) shirt and kissed his (little) <banned word filter activated>..”
روى أنه صلى الله عليه و سلم قبل زبيبة الحسن أو الحسين
He (the prophet) kissed the (little) <banned word filter activated> of al Hassan or al Husein
رأيت النبي صلى الله عليه و سلم فرج ما بين فخذي الحسين و قبل زبيبته
He (the prophet) put Husein’s legs apart and kissed his (little) <banned word filter activated>

Another Hadith. Majma al-Zawa’id, Ali ibn Abu Bakr al-Haythami, 299/9 مجمع الزوائد لعلي بن أبى بكر الهيثمي

رأيت رسول الله صلى الله عليه و سلم فرج ما بين فخذي الحسين و قبل زبيبته
رواه الطبراني و إسناده حسن
translated into English: “I saw the Messenger of Allah pbuh putting Husein’s legs apart and kissing his (little) <banned word filter activated>.”

 

You're chatting nonsense. Show me the beauty in any of the above.

Where did you get that from???

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, dallysingh101 said:

Where did you get that from???

Hadith Number 16245, Volume Title: “The Sayings of the Syrians,” Chapter Title: “Hadith of Mu’awiya Ibn Abu Sufyan."

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so many times warnings come and yet we know they changed the writings:

فَوَيْلٌ لِّلَّذِينَ يَكْتُبُونَ الْكِتَابَ بِأَيْدِيهِمْ ثُمَّ يَقُولُونَ هَٰذَا مِنْ عِندِ اللَّهِ لِيَشْتَرُوا بِهِ ثَمَنًا قَلِيلًا ۖ فَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا كَتَبَتْ أَيْدِيهِمْ وَوَيْلٌ لَّهُم مِّمَّا يَكْسِبُونَ - 2:79

 

SAHIH INTERNATIONAL

So woe to those who write the "scripture" with their own hands, then say, "This is from Allah," in order to exchange it for a small price. Woe to them for what their hands have written and woe to them for what they earn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW , did anyone else notice that the "chola" sikhs wear is quite similar to the arab men's dress . 

I wonder why !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

BTW , did anyone else notice that the "chola" sikhs wear is quite similar to the arab men's dress . 

I wonder why !

Arab and hindu ones open to the side but our ones open centrally (or the rules they are meant to) Arab ones are without Kalian 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, dallysingh101 said:

You got it the wrong way round. The term rabh actually comes from Islam, Panjabis adopted it. 

I knew that actually lol . It came in punjabi from arabic.

Other interesting word "nehar" (river) is actually from hebrew ! Nehar in hebrew means river. It probably came via arabic and persian into punjabi

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

BTW , did anyone else notice that the "chola" sikhs wear is quite similar to the arab men's dress . 

I wonder why !

And both are similar to the robes of a handful of other communities of millions in that part of the world. What's your point?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your content will need to be approved by a moderator

Guest
You are commenting as a guest. If you have an account, please sign in.
Reply to this topic...

×   You have pasted content with formatting.   Remove formatting

  Only 75 emoticons maximum are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

Loading...

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Blase means to be indifferent or unconcerned. However, you perceive my writing on Dasam Bani being reintroduced to be both nonchalant (why don't we bring in another French word) but also emotional and angry at the same time. That kind of makes for an oxymoron; contradictory terms.  When attempting to have any genuine and fruitful discussion I have experienced it is helpful to not speculate or make conjecture about the viewpoints of another. If curious or in doubt, just ask; ask with the innocent interest of a child. Other genuine level-headed people will gladly oblige. Fools like myself may otherwise find injury in your guesswork.   Bringing in Samparda Kathavachaks fixes the symptom not the illness. The root problem that will fester and multiply is unaddressed. Is this a strategy for the long term that will bring unity and togetherness in the Panth? No. I have posted an excerpt of my last post on this topic below for your convenience, often my arguments become TL;DR.     Again, conjecture and scorn for a person you genuinely want to have dialogue with may not be useful. Some may misinterpret your heartfelt intentions.   If I'm not mistaken, it was rescinded after just two years!  Here is the difference: When the Sikhs took the jagir from the Mughals, they took it after deliberation, discussion, and the approval of the Sarbat Khalsa Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma has built no such discussion and consensus building into his strategy, not even with the Sant Samaj. Heaps of them condemn his political choices.  Getting the discourse changed to Gurmat is good. But the underlying problems remain unaddressed; problems that do the most to hold the Panth back as outlined in my above post.  The jagir allowed the Sikhs to consolidate different jathas under the leadership of Kapur Singh into the Dal Khalsa. Factions were brought together.  They used the political calm to develop their autonomous power and establish their sovereignty This was political power and control that they were able to grow for the Panth. The jagir was taken away very quickly, but look at what they accomplished in that time. The Khalsa was brought together in unity to fight for our future prosperity.  I highly doubt the SIkhs who had been hunted down by Zakariya Khan suddenly became enthralled by his friendship. They took the jagir in a collective, panthic decision and likely knew they could be double-crossed. But they mustered their forces and were in a stronger position for when it did happen.  In all the major issues of the Panth that I have outlined in my previous posts, Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma has made little headway in ameliorating them.  No political autonomy is established for the Panth. The Indian government regulated the SGPC, the SGPC in turn is run by Badal and the Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal). There is no autonomy or control of the Panth in its own affairs, we are led by the string where the political elite wish to go.  As I stated previously: Baba Harnam Singh Dhumma's strategy gives the Panth no autonomy, no control, and he has not pushed forward the Panth's interests in any worthwhile long-lasting way.   
    • It is by Kavi Santokh Singh Suraj Parkesh Granth
    • This is exactly the same thing which Muslim Kings and army was saying about Sikhs a few centuries ago. In fact, these Muslim rulers were saying that no Sikh is left, however, Sikhs did become rulers of the land after couple of Genocides. I am not saying it is going to be easy with Hindu India, but you are under estimating Sikhs. 
    • Sakhi from  Subedar Baghel Singh “Jivan Anubhav” his autobiography. He says one day after his simran he sat down to rest. His Astral body (sookham sahreer) separated from his body went through the roof at a very high speed. His Astal body left the earth behind and ended up in a place where there were various Sant mandalis. He was surprised to see himself in two separate place but mere thought of his body brought him back inside his body. Similar stories can also be found in pachmi parkash jeeven sant Karam Singh Hotimardan and Se Kinehya Jeeveni Sant Harnam Singh Rampurkhera.