Jump to content
TheeTurbanator

Need help answering a Christian's Questions on the nature of Waheguru in Sikhi

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, GurjantGnostic said:

I wouldn't read anything on there. They are all hippies who look like Sikhs.

Share this post


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

If you read the torah, you have to pick the "blueberries" out.  And read between the lines.  So there is some gnosis, or truth about God in it. 

The Guru Granth Sahib is only "blueberries"

Yeah, that's a good way of putting it. I agree that it would be ludicrous to say that other religions (including Islam) have no truth whatsoever

On the other hand, Guru Granth Sahib is pure truth, or simply, God.

  • Thanks 2

Share this post


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

I wouldn't read anything on there. They are all hippies who look like Sikhs.

Anyone can grow a beard.

Oh and BhForce, I love how you answer with Gurbani so well.  I wish Guest Singh would read some Gurbani or quote some Gurbani.

Mr. Doaba you were my first teacher here, and have continually been a brother to me here.  Thank you both.

Edited by GurjantGnostic
  • Like 1
  • Confused 2

Share this post


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

the way of peace

Again this is what we're fed. "islam means peace, islam is peace". I have never heard such bollocks in my life. There was nothing peaceful about their demented leaders life.

I just read that article on SikhNet. I have no idea what drugs that man on twitter has been taking. He is a left-wing whackjob. As are the people commending him.

  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well I remember why I didn't make it far into the Quaran before.  So much doom and gloom.  Sigh.

Edit: What I had heard about Mohammed I am not finding in the Quaran.

Edit: I was indeed naive and wrong Ji.  Thank you.  I've read as much of this as I can.  I basically got through all of it too. 

My previous posts are preserved for posterity in the quotes used by the forum members to enlighten me.  I've removed the original posts because I can't stand by them at all and it felt cleansing.

Edited by GurjantGnostic
  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/17/2018 at 2:53 PM, TheeTurbanator said:

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh! 

 

Here is a question i I received from a Christian who is studying Sikhi: 

If waheguru is eternal and encompasses the universe (but not limited to just the universe itself) and has existed always and will always continue to exist, how did ego enter into at least part of the world? if waheguru is inside all things including humans, at what point did parts of waheguru (by parts I mean humans, animals etc) get "infected" with ego? It would stand to reason that something pure like waheguru could never succumb to ego. for example the gurus or fully realized people will never succumb to ego again, correct? so if waheguru existed eternally, how did ego enter? has ego also existed eternally with waheguru? (I don't think this is the Sikhi standpoint).

Is it possible for waheguru to cease existing permanently, or for waheguru to tell lies? I would assume that it would not be, since it goes against waheguru's nature, correct? Why would waheguru create confusion/ego/illusion and cause part of itself to be deluded?

How do Sikh's know then that the Gurus never made a mistake, if as you say it's possible for a fully realized person to become deluded? Based on this, is it even possible that waheguru spoke some falsehoods or lies, even in the SGGS or part of the Sikh teachings?” 

How would you answere this question? 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Good question.

According to my undertanding, Sikhi/Gurbani's ultimate position on universal unified absolute reality/truth is ALIVE in its existence truth- mool mantar any kind of fragmentation of that truth afterwards such as topic of ego, mind, body discussed in gurbani is based on relative reality to further expand or explain or cater various seekers sitting at various state of mind. From absolute point of view-mool mantar, ego nor illusion doesn't exist as there is only ONE AND ONLY ONE IKONGKAR infused everywhere its one without a second. There is no other. So question of ego doesn't arise. Previous member bought up 21st asthpadi, which would be ultimate principle and truth.

 

 

Edited by N30S1NGH
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This exact question is in Asa Ki //...haumai kitho upjeh, kit sanjam eh jayee 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/18/2018 at 1:23 AM, TheeTurbanator said:

Here is a question i I received from a Christian who is studying Sikhi: 

Could you now pose the questions I posed to your Christian "friend" and tell us what his answers are?

Also a few more:

Is it possible for Jehovah to cease existing?

If Jesus is God, then why did Jesus call out to God the Father asking why He had forsaken him? Does that mean God can fall into low spirits (dhendi kala)? If so, is He really God? If He's depressed, how can he help us out of our depressions?

Or is He really all-powerful? If it's possible for him to not be perfect, is it possible that what Jesus taught can be said to be imperfect? If so, cannot his words in the Bible said to be imperfect? And if Jesus was imperfect, then his disciples become imperfect by extension, correct? And if his disciples were imperfect, then what they wrote in the Bible is imperfect, too, by extension, correct?

If Jesus is God, then why was Jesus tempted in the desert when Satan tempted him? Is God tempted by Maya? If so, is Maya more powerful than Jesus (or Jehovah)?
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/19/2018 at 3:25 AM, N30S1NGH said:

From absolute point of view-mool mantar, ego nor illusion doesn't exist as there is only ONE AND ONLY ONE IKONGKAR infused everywhere its one without a second. There is no other. So question of ego doesn't arise.

Right, from one point of view, there is only Parmatma. From Rehras:

ਤੂੰ ਆਪੇ ਦਾਤਾ ਆਪੇ ਭੁਗਤਾ ਜੀ ਹਉ ਤੁਧੁ ਬਿਨੁ ਅਵਰੁ ਨ ਜਾਣਾ ॥

You Yourself are the Giver, and You Yourself are the Enjoyer. I know no other than You.

ਸੋਪੁਰਖੁ ਆਸਾ (ਮਃ ੪) (੧) ੨:੩ - ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ : ਅੰਗ ੧੧ ਪੰ. ੨ 
Raag Asa Guru Ram Das

 

Bhai Gurdas ji elucidates this viewpoint:

ਆਪੇ ਭੁਖਾ ਹੋਇਕੈ ਆਪਿ ਜਾਇ ਰਸੋਈ।

He (the Lord) Himself posing to be hungry goes into the kitchen and cooks the food kneading in it all sorts of delights.

ਭੋਜਨ ਆਪਿ ਬਣਾਇਦਾ ਰਸ ਵਿਚਿ ਰਸ ਗੋਈ।

Himself eating and getting satiated He showers praises on the dainty dishes.

ਆਪੇ ਖਾਇ ਸਲਾਹਿਕੈ ਹੋਇ ਤ੍ਰਿਪਤਿ ਸਮੋਈ।

He Himself is the delight as well as the delighted.

ਆਪੇ ਰਸੀਆ, ਆਪਿ ਰਸ, ਰਸੁ ਰਸਨਾ ਭੋਈ।

He is the juice as well as the tongue which relishes its taste.

ਦਾਤਾ ਭੁਗਤਾ ਆਪਿ ਹੈ, ਸਰਬੰਗ ਸਮੋਈ।

He permeating through all, Himself is the giver as well as receiver.

ਆਪੇ ਆਪਿ ਵਰਤਦਾ ਗੁਰਮੁਖਿ ਸੁਖੁ ਹੋਈ ॥੩॥

Knowing the fact that He permeates among all, the Gurmukh feels immense pleasure.

ਵਾਰਾਂ ਭਾਈ ਗੁਰਦਾਸ : ਵਾਰ ੨ ਪਉੜੀ ੩ ਪੰ. ੬

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ego arises due to ignorance agyaan of our true nature and is created by Maya to keep the human being within the 3 modes.  Maya constantly keeps the human alternating within them its only in the fourth state does ego die.

In ignorance of reality the human being mistakes the rope for a snake and so is unhappy and scared.  When the light of knowledge dawns he realizes that it was his own ignorance of the truth 

Eh sareer sab Maya Ka putla 

 

Edited by singh598

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 1/20/2018 at 3:57 AM, BhForce said:

Right, from one point of view, there is only Parmatma. From Rehras:

Thanks for your feedback. But i do like to stress this is just NOT one point of view, this is absolute truth point of view listed in gurbani which we supposed to be stressed and striving for. Unfortunately, ego doesn't like it to give out ownership back where it belongs -actual doer Vahiguru as it threatens its existence, so ego will try all kind of defense coping mechanism and held on to relative realities.

On the question of doership maharaj responds:

Ang-278

ਜਬ ਇਹ ਜਾਨੈ ਮੈ ਕਿਛੁ ਕਰਤਾ ॥
जब इह जानै मै किछु करता ॥
Jab ih jānai mai kicẖẖ karṯā.
As long as this mortal thinks that he is the one who does things,

ਤਬ ਲਗੁ ਗਰਭ ਜੋਨਿ ਮਹਿ ਫਿਰਤਾ ॥
तब लगु गरभ जोनि महि फिरता ॥
Ŧab lag garabẖ jon mėh firṯā.
he shall wander in reincarnation through the womb.

This is key Guru Maharaj updesh, as long as mortal thinks he/she is doer that causes further fragmentation/identification with separate I-personal ego I and separate desires and actions of personal I that further ensues karma be it good and bad that determines next birth, current life situations/birth.

 

This from Sant Jagjit Singh Harkhowale katha:

 

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
 
Raag means-individualistic love/attachment/desires with ego, Dvaish- partiality/dualistic mind
 
From Avidya(ignorance that this jiv is separate) everything is born.
 
Here is the cycle-
 
From Avidya (ignorance this jiv is seperate) - ego is born.
 
From ahankar (ego) doership is born then- raag and dvaish is born
 
From Raag and Dvaish- karams are born
 
And from Karam, this individual jev(person) goes through cycle rebirth/reincarnation of seperations from Vahiguroo.
 
 
Here is Same cycle shown reversed in order to go back to our real self-
 
 
If one does not wish to have sorrow in future, have a genuine desire not be born seperated again from Vahiguroo.
 
If you have desire not be born seperated again from Vahiguroo, don't do karams with your individualistic mind affected with ego.
 
In order not to do karams with your individualistic mind- don't do raag dvaish.
 
In order not to do raag dvaish- rise above from egoistic mind.
 
In order not to have egoistic mind- learn internal bibek with buddhi(intellect). Buddhi(intellect-pure cognitve perception) other end is atma
 
In order to have true internal bibek, use bhramgyan(knowledge of real self) to destroy avidya.
 
 
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Edited by N30S1NGH

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Does that mean OP can do a sehaj path of sri dasam granth sahib ji?
    • The bigger the difference in height, the more odd you will look together, and you might not feel comfortable with a well-below height partner
    • https://uk.yahoo.com/news/conmen-jailed-92-year-old-victim-plays-game-lures-arrests-084708670.html
    • but he also says later that if the husband becomes nastik a wife has the right to disassociate herself from him .
    • Agree with the fact that Talaq is not compatible with Sikhi. Even the word comes from Muslim lands. However, I think you paint with too broad a brush when you call divorce an "abrahamic thing". Christianity doesn't allow divorce, except for just a couple of specified situations: Jesus said:  He said to them, “It was because you were so hard-hearted that Moses allowed you to divorce your wives, but from the beginning it was not so. 9 And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for unchastity, and marries another commits adultery.”[a] Matthew 19 Marriage is seen as a holy sacrament in Christianity. By contrast, there is nothing holy about marriage in Islam. It is merely a worldly contract, and divorce is explicitly allowed in the Koran.
×