Former atheist here, I always look for the flaws in religion. Thus far I have found none in Sikhi. Am reading the Guru Granth Sahib currently. The Abrahamic faiths I would never consider as completely true as they contain slavery. Later I began studying Buddhism and other Eastern beliefs. The Eastern religions lacked god and a meaning to life for me. Thanks for making the Sikhi videos in English or I would have missed out on learning about Sikhi.
hello mary could you provide me with your email ID, i have something interesting article and pdf to share with you relating to ur comment, u can also message me at clarityispower1699@gmail.com
The Concept Of Atma And Paramatma Is Thought By Krishna In Bhagvad Gita Chapter 13.... And same thing He Said Only Wise knows about soul and Supreme Soul And Only That Person attains liberation.
Vineet yes Krishna did explained and enlightened about our soul and supreme soul , But here the mention is particularly referring to falsehood preached by Brahmins n pandit to segregate society, idol stone worship etc. So people in hindu domain are deviod of blissfull experience due to their preachers falsehood.
@@jsps4108 Yes . I agree . Majority of people don't know how hard it is to become a true Brahman. Brahman has the duty to preach. But today majority of them preach falsehood , rob people and the image of brahman is totally maligned. But there are still true bhakts (in kalyug becoming a bhakt and practicing bhakti is greater than becoming brahaman) for e.g Iskcon. They have still maintained truth of Sanatan dharma. God Bless!
The pheras in a Sikh wedding are known as 'laavan' and the count to be four in number. The word 'laavan' is a spiritual term used for the union of 'Atma' (Bride) with the 'Parmatma' (Groom). Each phera has a verse associated with it which describes the various stages of the marital love and the importance of a wedding.
I think this was very informative, so keep the videos coming. As far as the versus where the Hindu is blind and the Muslim is one eyed; I don't think that was meant offended anyone, it was merely a literary allusion to show what we as Sikhs believe in compared to what other religions believe in on the basis of our teachings about believing in one God and finding God within ourselves/around. But its definitely not saying that Hindus and Muslims are blind to God, because at the end of the day we are all the same to God. Going back to the subject of Sikhs having both eyes open; not all Sikhs act the way they should therefore not having both eyes open. I know people that drink,party,have big tattoos of Kandaes and like to identify as a Sikh, but they would be considered just as blind as the Hindu.
Guru Gobind Singh Ji was once asked the question, "Which religion is better, yours or mine?" His response? "Tum ko tumhara khoob, hum ko hamara khoob". Now you tell me, do we respond to a preacher by saying the Hindus are blind and the Muslims are one-eyed or do we follow the sweetness of the Guru's word?
It's a metaphor.. It saying that hindus think only spiritually, and Muslims only think of god. Sikhs have both eyes of God and they think of spirit and God, they get the whole picture.
Sometimes child does wrong thing constantly everyday then someone can say some words to him,this words was said at that time "Hindu Anna, Turku. Kaana".
I agree with most of things described in this video only if they are meant for creating awareness among Sikhs.. But few things which should be always kept in mind 1: It doesn't mean Sikhs who have been blessed with both eyes (according to the text shown above in SGGSJi) necessarily have their eyes open in real world too.. Therefore, Sikhs shouldn't remember this point merely for purpose of defending themselves or take pride or use this as argument to show disrespect to other religions. Sikhs should follow this principal in their real lives as well.. 2 : Every religion have certain rituals or practices ( some religions have more ,some have less)..But that doesn't mean they are wrong ..we should focus on good teachings of religious text .For example,Religious texts are like a text book of a certain subject used in various schools published under different authors but purpose is more or less same i.e complete understanding of that particular subject.. But unfortunately it doesn't mean all students who read these books will become experts in that particular subject or rather most of them will never wish to study this subject or those who wish will never fully comprehend this real message given in the book. I believe these rituals or practices are like co-curricular activities in a school..some schools have more and others rarely imply those on their students.. But our ultimate goal as a religious student should be understanding and meditating upon the biggest truth of life i.e Almighty or Waheguru or Allah or Rama and list goes on.. Here is one example in QUOTE from very beginning of Salok mahalla 9 . ਗੁਨ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਗਾਇਓ ਨਹੀ ਜਨਮੁ ਅਕਾਰਥ ਕੀਨੁ ॥ If you do not sing the Praises of the Lord, your life is rendered useless. ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਹਰਿ ਭਜੁ ਮਨਾ ਜਿਹ ਬਿਧਿ ਜਲ ਕਉ ਮੀਨੁ ॥੧॥ Says Nanak, meditate, vibrate upon the Lord; immerse your mind in Him, like the fish in the water.
Superficiality abounds in all religion. Each religion is mutually exclusive, here's a good example: "Verily the only acceptable religion to Allah is Islam." (Quran 3:19). Guru Maharaj is telling us to rise above such foolery and accept all is an extrapolation of Sri par-Atma. Thus only that way is true which is all inclusive and open to the notion that all is 'Ik,' or one.
All roads lead to the same place, some get there quicker; others enjoy the journey and get there a little later. It is not a race, just a wonderful experience. Remember, the holiday doesn't start when you arrive at your destination; it begins when you lock the front door and step out into the street.
What i understand from that verse is that it is particularly targeted at preachers of religion. In hindu domain society is segregated by caste and several means of worship, idol worship etc. Spirituality gets lost in these segregation. Muslims have turn to hate and punish who they see as false. Again a sign that love and mercy which is considered mother of religion is not there. So these verse are trying to irradiate those wrongs. Its Not that all people who are following religions in hind and muslim domain are making the same mistake. But majority of them. Only few understand truth and even fewer attain Bliss.
in pg 885 bani answers this question - some pray,some prostate, some worship idols,,, god is the Cause of Causes - hence all these religions exist - but sikhi is the only religion that can reveal the WILL of god to you.. it also says god is generous,, so god gave religions to all these people - but to a sikh all religion are the same because a sikh can see what these religons are and what are teaching the people.. but the supreme truth is with the sikh because the sikhs can see it all
Paaji pan Prahlada aur Hiranyakashipu mein Bhakt Prahlad ne kaha ke Vishnu saab jagah hai......aur Mahabharata mein be Virat Roop. Aur Brahmand, Antarjyothi bhi hai na.....bhas ankh band kardi🙏
One more line of guru granth sahib ji based on this topic,musalman ka ek khuda e, Kabir ka swami rahiya smae, Mean muslims says there is one god,but kabir realises that my god is spreaded whole over the universe like invisible curtain.🙏
very nice I have seen Sikhs who say Sikhism teaches to respect all religions which is true but they don't see that sometimes that becomes to practising those religions and islam don't seem to believe that allah lives in mecca but some muslim might then and now although most muslim do called the kaaba the house of god
Abu hafsa they clearly bow down to kaaba I have seen videos of haj just like hindus bow down to their idols iand no most call the kaaba the house of god not all mosques in quran houses it is talking about is about believing muslims houses
Kabir Uddin you can stand on most idols because it would break the kaaba is strong and you can stand on it without breaking just like for muslims they bow down to the direction kaaba in the temple the hindu bow down in the direction of the idol
Kabir Uddin in temple all hindus bow down toward idol that is also unity but you say hindus are idol worshipper and are blasemphing god don't say that about hindus then or Sikhs who bow down to guru granth sahibji both religions have different interpretation when they bow down to idol or text
Namdev ji left this earth before appearance of guru Nanak dev ji and thus stating Namdevj and calling sikhs( belong to Sikhism) as equal to Giyani ( 2 eyes open) is foolish. If Sikhs( means religion) had 2 eyes( knowing self and glories of lord) then never had to make this anti conversion series. At that time (13 th century) Hindu means all the followers of indigenous eastern religions which also include now a day Sikhism. I may be wrong, then please correct me!!
Guru seprated the gold out of earth and included the truth only. Everyone is spiritually different, so here only those Sikhs are in reference with Gyani who have understood the message Guru wanted to deliver. Not every sikh is a Sikh from inside. And I really can't blame those hindus who chose to be Gursikhs and leaving their rituals and superstitions. They chose their own path and so do you.
Please clarify. You say all the names of God are the same. 1) Does that mean Allah = Vishnu = Jehovah = Jesus = Akal Purakh? 2) Assuming yes to the first, does Sikhi state that the falsehood is in the teachings about these gods and the full truth is in Sikhi? For example, the Bible contains lies about Jesus Christ and his message of salvation? I 100% agree that all people are equal. We are all one blood! Thanks for the education. I agree that different religions have different aspects of the truth and falsehood, but at most only one can be true.
+DrFrankencelery SIkhi is the complete truth. Whatever does not tally with the truth of Sikhi is not true.. for example the one life theory, or exclusivity, or last prophethood, or theraising of the dead on judgement day.. or even the story of adam and eve... My view is that Jesus was a saint, but that his message was not captured properly in the bible or by St Paul.
+Basics of Sikhi Thank you for the response. My questions were regarding the content of the video. It stated that it doesn't matter which name you use and where you pray. Does Sikhi teach that Jehovah = Jesus = Allah = Vishnu etc.? I don't quite understand what was meant.
+Dr Frankencelery Well lets say you use the word Vishnu to refer to ALmighty God, then its fine, but if you use it to refer to the Sustainer deity, and also then believe in Brahma and Shiva, then you're still lost at lower levels. If you say Jesus and mean God, then thats find but if you believe that he is the only form of God on earth, then you're again stuck in exclusiveness. Calling Gods name is a must, but it must be for God, not someone else
+Basics of Sikhi Thanks for the clarification. That makes more sense than what the video seemed to be saying. Not related to the video but more so your comment: Of course, being stuck in exclusiveness isn't a bad thing. All religions and non-religions are exclusive; they only include what is considered "true" and exclude was is considered false.
5:40 Saying the Hindu has no understanding of the atma is a laughable statement at best and all of this just because we pray or meditate in the direction of an idol ? If that were true then the concept of "bhagwan" wouldn't even exist in our religious terminology , we wouldve had only the names of our deities or gods themselves . "Bhagawan" is the master of all "bhagas" of reality that can be experienced by every single "Jivatma" . It is omnipotent, omniscient and is shapeless and formless I quote from Yajurveda, one of the Vedas: Yajurveda, 32:3: “There is no image of Him.” There is no image or idol of the formless one and that is recognised by the ancient scriptures. The Vedas do not mention idol worship at all. The Mandukya Upanishad in exquisite simplicity even goes to the point of destroying all discussion of Aatma and ParamAatma. Before the SGGS was formed, this Upanishad lauded Brahman or God and spoke of the one consciousness, the one Supreme Being. And that there is nothing but God: Ang 485: ਸਭੁ ਗੋਬਿੰਦੁ ਹੈ ਸਭੁ ਗੋਬਿੰਦੁ ਹੈ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਬਿਨੁ ਨਹੀ ਕੋਈ ॥ सभु गोबिंदु है सभु गोबिंदु है गोबिंद बिनु नही कोई ॥ Sabẖ gobinḏ hai sabẖ gobinḏ hai gobinḏ bin nahī ko▫ī. God is everything, God is everything. Without God, there is nothing at all. The Upanishads laud the one eternal Being that resides within and out. In fact, the Upanishads destroy the boundary itself of "within" and "without". The Upanishads speak of the concept of an individual which they consider the sense of separation from God. In the same way, that the Guru speaks of "haumai" or "ego". Another beautiful example of this concept is Ahaṁ Brahmāsmīti (अहं ब्रह्मास्मीति) I am Brahman or "I am the Infinite Reality" or "I am the Ultimate". It is one of the four Mahavakyas used to explain the unity of macrocosm and microcosm. This memorable expression appears in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad when the sage, in the context of meditation on the Self, in reply to the query - What did that Brahma know by which It became all? - states:- "ब्रह्म वा इदमग्र आसीत्, तदात्मनामेवावेत्, अहं ब्रह्मास्मीति | तस्मात्तत्सर्वमभवत्; तद्यो यो देवानां प्रत्यबुध्यत स एव तदभवत्, तदषीर्णाम् तथा मनुष्याणाम्,..." "This (self) was indeed Brahma in the beginning; It knew only Itself as, "I am Brahma". Therefore It became all; and whoever among the gods knew It also became That; and the same with sages and men…” - (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad I.iv.10) In his comment on this passage Sankara explains that here Brahman is not the conditioned Brahma (saguna), that a transitory entity cannot be eternal, that knowledge about Brahma, the infinite all-pervading entity, has been enjoined, that knowledge of unity alone dispels ignorance and that the meditation based on resemblance is only an idea. He also tells us that the expression Aham Brahmaasmi is the explanation of the mantra - पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात्पूर्णमुदच्यते | पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते || "That ('Brahma') is infinite, and this ('universe') is infinite; the infinite proceeds from the infinite. (Then) taking the infinitude of the infinite ('universe'), it remains as the infinite ('Brahma') alone." - (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad V.i.1) He explains that unity and plurality are contradictory only when applied to the Self, which is eternal and without parts, but not to the effects, which have parts. The aham in this memorable expression is not closed in itself as a pure mental abstraction but it is radical openness. Between Brahma and aham-brahma lies the entire temporal universe experienced by the ignorant as a separate entity (duality) I honestly have a lot of respect for you man and i want you to only speak the truth as you always have and to speak the truth one must have a better understanding of the truth.
Then worship sumpreme instead of stones or deties etc etc ....for Instance don't waste milk on shiv linga rather give it to needy shiv will be bless you ....yes if you want to give respect to Shiva you may do Abhishek with your pure thoughts or bhakti instead of milk curd ghee shakar etc etc
Shalok you are quoting form Vedas is not from Hindu It is from Sanatan ..and is truth but unfortunately I failed to understand why Sanatan dharm devides humans into 4 races and why shrudra has been given lowest status and behavior accordingly after all they are also humans ...Guru sahib considers Manas Ji jaat sab ek pachaneo .. waheguru Ji
It is incredulous of you to suggest that the word "gyani" is a synonym for a Sikh. This is not a matter of opinion. This is factually incorrect. A gyani in the context in which the word is being used here refers to a enlightened man. An enlightened man can be a pir, a wandering sannyasi or a pandit. To suggest that a Sikh should volley a response back at preachers which calls Muslims one-eyed and Hindus blind is woefully misguided. Naam Dayv is mocking the manner in which Hindus and Muslims are practicing their faith. He is categorically not disparaging either the Hindu or the Muslim way. In the same shabad from which this Bani is quoted, Naam Dayv says: ਹਿੰਦੂ ਪੂਜੈ ਦੇਹੁਰਾ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਣੁ ਮਸੀਤਿ ॥ हिंदू पूजै देहुरा मुसलमाणु मसीति ॥ Hinḏū pūjai ḏehurā musalmāṇ masīṯ. The Hindu worships at the temple, the Muslim at the mosque. ਨਾਮੇ ਸੋਈ ਸੇਵਿਆ ਜਹ ਦੇਹੁਰਾ ਨ ਮਸੀਤਿ ॥੪॥੩॥੭॥ नामे सोई सेविआ जह देहुरा न मसीति ॥४॥३॥७॥ Nāme so▫ī sevi▫ā jah ḏehurā na masīṯ. ||4||3||7|| Naam Dayv serves that Lord, who is not limited to either the temple or the mosque By extension, your implication suggests that Naam Dayv excludes Sikhs because they go to the Gurdwara to worship God. Naam Dayv would mock the everyday Sikh in much the same manner as he has done the Muslim and the Hindu of those times. To suggest otherwise is nothing but rabble-rousing. You quite rightly rebuke the state of the Sikh Panth but feel at ease to say "the Sikhs have got both eyes open". From Guru Arjan Devi Ji, Ang 266: ਸਰਬ ਧਰਮ ਮਹਿ ਸ੍ਰੇਸਟ ਧਰਮੁ ॥ सरब धरम महि स्रेसट धरमु ॥ Sarab ḏẖaram mėh saresat ḏẖaram. Of all religions, the best religion ਹਰਿ ਕੋ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਿ ਨਿਰਮਲ ਕਰਮੁ ॥ हरि को नामु जपि निरमल करमु ॥ Har ko nām jap nirmal karam. is to chant the Name of the Lord and maintain pure conduct. This is precisely what Naam Dayv meant. The instruction from your Master, the Guru Granth Sahib, is to reject any utterly useless discussion of comparing faiths and to sing the Name of the Lord.
***** I have not completely missed the point at all. I have pointed out a factual inaccuracy which was the crux of my post which you have not addressed at all. Instead, the bulk of your post is arguing against a phantom point and is contextually misplaced as well. I said: "Naam Dayv would mock the everyday Sikh in much the same manner as he has done the Muslim and the Hindu of those times" I referenced the "everyday Sikh". "Everyday" as in the adjective of the common, ordinary man who claims to be practising Sikhi today. I did NOT say Naam Dayv would mock the values and teachings of the faith. With the greatest of respect, you've misread what I have written and implied instead a misunderstanding on my behalf. The everyday Sikh of today is not even familiar with the word meditation let alone is he a practitioner of it. The Sikh Panth has drifted from the Guru in the same manner as the Hindus and the Muslims have moved away from the teachings of their religions. So just as I said in my original post, Naam Dayv was mocking the manner in which "religious people" were practising their faiths. And sadly, the Sikh Panth is no different. I have no inclination whatsoever to compare faiths or the perspective mainstream Sikhs versus Hindus and Muslims so I offer no comment on that portion of your post. Unless you're quoting me from the Guru, I have nothing of value to opine.
***** And lastly, the final line of your post agrees wholly with the statement I made in my original post. You said: "This path has been alive since time began but the people lost their ways. All the Gurus', Bhagats and Bhatt were above religion." I had said: "It is incredulous of you to suggest that the word "gyani" is a synonym for a Sikh. This is not a matter of opinion. This is factually incorrect. A gyani in the context in which the word is being used here refers to a enlightened man. An enlightened man can be a pir, a wandering sannyasi or a pandit." Gurus, Bhagats, Bhatts... All fit the definition of a "gyani" in this context. So although you say I completely missed the point, your sentiment is in actuality rather similar to mine.
***** Yes, our definition of a Sikh is certainly different. Your definition also differs from Jagraj Singh if you've watched his recent videos. You are also probably discarding the majority of the Sikh Panth with your definition. If you think a baptised Sikh becomes a Sikh of the Guru who lives a perfect lifestyle then we are from different worlds. The Sikh Panth is run by people who fit your definition of a Sikh and look at the state it is in... Naam Dayv would criticise the Sikhs of today, baptised or not, in much the same way. I'm only speaking from experience here. I do not know where you are from but come down to Park Avenue Gurdwara in Southall and we can speak to hundreds of baptised Sikhs - old and young. Meditation is associated with Yogis for them. If you tell them, you can experience God, they will think you are a madman. I am not exaggerating here. I use my words literally, not figuratively. Nobody here is criticising a Sikh of the shabad. I squarely said the Sikh Panth of today fall into the same category as the one-eyed Muslims and the blind Hindus that Naam Dayv referred to in his mocking summation of their ways. Just like the thread of the brahman was criticised, the kirpan of the Sikh is criticised where it is worn ceremonially and with no regard for Bani. There is no difference whatsoever. The Gurus rejected the lifestyle of the renunciate - they did not say you could not be a liberated man if you did happen to be a sannyasi. That's something you are saying. Was Ramana Maharshi not liberated because he didn't live the life of a householder? In the same way that you say a pandit or a pir cannot be liberated, do the misguided Muslims claim Islam is the only way to God. A true pandit has discovered the gold of the Upanishads and the Vedas. A true pir sees God in everyone. For you, these are perhaps not the opinions of a Sikh and so I can only say we are looking in different directions. I did not mean to dispute points of merit; my intention was to only preserve the context of the shabad and prevent it from being interpreted in the manner in which it has in this video. I reiterate, a "gyani" is in no way a synonym for a "Sikh" as used in this video. If you do not believe me, I encourage you to seek the educated second-opinion of a Sikh scholar - someone cognisant of Sanskrit ideally.
And while we are on the topics of definitions, they are only ever sweet to me when they come from my Master. Guru Amar Das Ji, Ang 601: ਸੋ ਸਿਖੁ ਸਖਾ ਬੰਧਪੁ ਹੈ ਭਾਈ ਜਿ ਗੁਰ ਕੇ ਭਾਣੇ ਵਿਚਿ ਆਵੈ ॥ सो सिखु सखा बंधपु है भाई जि गुर के भाणे विचि आवै ॥ So sikẖ sakẖā banḏẖap hai bẖā▫ī jė gur ke bẖāṇe vicẖ āvai. He alone is a Sikh, a friend, a relative and a sibling, who walks in the Way of the Guru's Will.
jasvir17 Please be aware that two different Gurbani quotes were used. First by Namdev ji, secondly by Guru Nanak Dev ji.. Neither of them was used to refer to a Sikh but to what the ideal of the "religion" is... here in SIkhi, it would be a BrahmGiani, or as Guru Nanak Dev ji says, "aap pachaane, boojhe soe" and in that context, it fits the idea of having two eyes open. Your other points are valid of course. Have you seen our video "what is a Sikh" in the one day course?
There's particularly no difference between Sanatan Dharma and Sikhi...Aatma, Parmatma, sva-gyan, karma, Samsara, moksha: Aatma ka Parmatma mei milan... These concepts are all and one.. Sikhi is the modified, refined form of Sanatani.. removing aadambar, jati pati bhed, andhvishwas. Jai Guru Nanak Dev Maharaj Ji 🙏🙏🙏
Yes exactly! There is no need to care about these differences just choose which path helps you get rid of haumai/ego the best who cares about what the religion is called. Sikhi is just a more modern take of the path of bhagti from Hinduism.
Actually that is not completely correct as if you read the sufism and the big scholars like ibn e arabi , Rumi and many more you will find that they all were trying to see inside ,even the sufism is all about seeing inside I am not defending but because it is true that is why i am saying so
Sufis can not conquer death because they don't have amrit. So they remain in Maya (delusion).And die repentant. NO ONE CAN MEET WAHEGURU WITHOUT SURRENDERING BEFORE GURU NANAK DEV JI MAHARAJ .SURRENDERING MEANS TAKING AMRIT. THERE IS NO OTHERWAY TO WAHEGURU
anounaki point no.1 - matha tek- the sangat (devotees) who visit the the gurdwara are considered as the light of the guru ''vich sangat har prabh vasse jio'' every sikh touches the floor of the gurdwara because the take the dust of the sangats feet so that they throw their egotism and take the guru's blessings of being humble. point no.2- the word GURU means GU: from darkness RU: to light and your claim on sanskrit is false because the guru granth sahib ji is written in gurumukhi script but has various languages in it - punjabi, awadhi, magadhi, sankrit , persian ,marathi, dakhni oankar so that guru sahib could make it easily accessible and understandable for the common man .''language is mean of communication , through which people communicate , the more important point or context is what person is saying rather than in what language he is saying , for example if I m telling someone in begali , who doesn't knows hindi or English to explain him content , dosent means I m steeling'' point 3. sikh never lost their land , maharaja ranjit singh won all the land till afghanistan and a hindu minister he trusted betrayed him. also in 1947 it was jawah lal nehru who used his dumbness to give away land and now because of stupid decision people in gujrat punjab and jammu kashmir face turmoil everyday , but sikh men stand at the border ready to give their life because they dont care which religion you belong to , more than 60% of armed forces is filled with sikhs that the greatness guru gobind singh ji gave us
You should first throw your ego away, people from last 3 yugas are continuously living in this land and claiming it because once sikh( not the actual meaning) empire was there is very foolish. A real sikh already gives his/her head to guru and they feel grateful for this opportunity but never heard of them showing off to public like many fake foolish( hopefully they learn in future) now do.
with all respect and admire your bravery , but i found you guilty when you talk about muslims making sajda to mecca , which is not true , mecca is only a direction when we muslims make sajda towards , so i will take you as an arrogant man and having propaganda for misleading people of the misinformtion of the islam and its faith .
God is not inside every human being! That is a massive contradiction to make. So if we go by this logic, a rapist has God inside him, so how do you classify that then? Its absurd. Muslims believe in a soul and a judgement day that all souls will be held accountable for their deeds. You have freewill on earth to do what you like, right or wrong but you will be held accountable.
@@HS-lz8jg There is no logical explanation for this. Its a belief. The concept of "Godly men" is against monotheism. Just like saying Jesus PBUH was God's son.
WE KNOW GOD IS INFINITE AND INCONCEIVABLE TO HUMAN MIND AND AT THE SAME TIME HE IS FINITE AND VERY CONCEIVABLE TO HUMAN MIND... DUALITY... IDOL WORSHIP BRINGS YOU TO THIS SECOND NATURE OF GOD WHERE WE THINK LOOKING TO THE VERY IDOL THAT HE IS CONCEIVABLE AND FINITE AND THEN THE MOST BEAUTIFUL THINGS START TO HAPPEN...WE TRY TO RELATE TO GOD AS IF HE IS AMONG US LIKE OUR FRIEND OR TEACHER OR PARENT OR LOVER.
@@johnsydney100 dont disrespect a prophet brother. You listen somewhere and just talk random shit. Guru Nanak rejects the concept of pleasing people with moracles.
@@johnsydney100 baba gurunanak did just roadside mirscle between him and bhai mardana there is no witness of these miracle plz must watch this video comolete Then answer me respect to all ruclips.net/video/0fetbRkZLd0/видео.html
@Abu Kevin Ibn Peter Very good dear. I like your question and comments. The miracle of miraj is mentioned in quran. Chapter no 17 verse no 1. Second. When prophet muhammad told this event to the people of Macca they laughed and make fun of them. The only person was abubakar friend of prophet who believed. People of mecca asked what did he see in jeroshilm masjid. Prophet told each and every thing in masjid Aqsa. Then they believed and embrace islam . Third . The animal was not donky. It was creature of light barak . Barak arabic means light. Fourth The purpose of this journy was that God showed the last prophet heaven and hell ho justify the claim of qursn That who will believe one God and his angels heaven and hell and all his prophet from adam to muhammad and believe judgement day and do good deeds. Your story is entirly different and unbelieveable. during all miracle of guru nanak no single person converted to sikh totally aimless. Fifth. Quran challanged the entireminkind. If you believe that this quran is not from God then produce a verse like quran ﷽ . Al Quran. Sura baqra No 2. Verse No. 23. And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Prophet [Muhammad], then produce a surah the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah, if you should be truthful. But if you dont and you will not be able to then fear the fire whose fuel is men and stone, prepared for the disbelievers. Sixth Quran claim only truth and prove its claim Sura Al Ahzaab No 33. Verse No. 40. Muhammad is not at all a father to any one male among you but he is the last Messenger of Allah and is the final of the prophets. Sura Aale Imran No. 3 Verse No. 85. And whose seek any other religion except islam it will never be accepted from him/ her and such person will be loser in the hereafter. QURAN Chapter 9, At-Taubah (Repentance) Verse 32-33 At-Taubah سورة التوبة They want to extinguish Allah's Light with their mouths, but Allah will not allow except that His Light should be perfected even though the disbelievers hate (it) (32)It is He Who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, to make it superior over all religions even though the idolators hate (it) It is recorded in the Sahih that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said, (Allah made the eastern and western parts of the earth draw near for me [to see], and the rule of my Ummah will extend as far as I saw.) Imam Ahmad recorded from Tamim Ad-Dari that he said, "I heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ saying, (Islam) will keep spreading as far as the night and day reach, until Allah will not leave a house made of mud or hair, but will make this religion enter it, while bringing might to a mighty person (a Muslim) and humiliation to a disgraced person (who rejects Islam). Might with which Allah elevates Islam (and its people) and disgrace with which Allah humiliates disbelief (and its people).) Tamim Ad-Dari [who was a Christian before Islam] used to say, "I have come to know the meaning of this Hadith in my own people. Those who became Muslims among them acquired goodness, honor and might. Disgrace, humiliation and Jizyah befell those who remained disbelievers."
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life. John 3:16 ESV Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. John 14:6 ESV
He also said Where are you God? Why have you forsaken me? Jeshua was great, but he was not complete with God. Otherwise he would never lose faith in the Lord.
@@Xx0Mystic0xX that is a misunderstanding. First, this was a real forsakenness. That is why. “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” means he really did. He really did. He is bearing our sin. He bore our judgment. The judgment was to have God the Father pour out his wrath, and instead of pouring it out on us, he pours it out on him. That necessarily involves a kind of abandonment. That is what wrath means. He gave him up to suffer the weight of all the sins of all of his people and the judgment for those sins. We cannot begin to fathom all that this would mean between the Father and the Son. To be forsaken by God is the cry of the damned, and he was damned for us. So he used these words because there was a real forsakenness. Jesus knew ahead of time what he was doing and what would happen to him and why he was doing it. His Father had sent him for this. This very moment. And he had agreed to come, knowing all that would happen.
Scripture teaches that Jesus has not merged with God; the two persons are still distinct. In fact, Jesus' role as the Son of God was declared "with power by the resurrection from the dead" (Ro 1:4). The New Testament authors are all in agreement on this, and often mention them as two separate individuals.
This guy is like any other preacher who is taking literal meaning of teachings and entirely forgeting essense. Obviously he has little or no knowlege of Hinduism as well. He claims hindus dont know about "atma" which is at best laughable. Whole theory of Atms and reincarnation and Moksha is derived from Yoga in Hinduism. And if you think that doing "arti" in jaganath puri has no purpose ,so does sitting beside a book like you do in Gurudwara. This guy's heart is filled with darkness.
Yes ,because sikhism respect every religion and teach a muslim to be a true muslim and hindu to be a true hindu . Sikh gurus and sikhs sacrificed their life for saving religion of hindu pandits and humanity.
Horrible video and a great example of why more people chose not to believe in god. In the beginning of the video you said Hindus worships rats which is not true thats just some temples that give milk and food to rats. Video was great except you adding your opinion on others religions like Hindus cant see param aatma because they go to stones? and Us Sikhs go to books so whos to say who can see param aatma or not. I hate to say this but these new generation of Sikh guys like this guy are trying to change SIkhism and tryiing to convince you that no other religion is better and we are far superior than other religions and though that might be true why not let individuals decide or how about just stay true to your religion and stop worrying about which religion is the best. Before I get all the hate comments I am sikh and I believe we should practice Sikhism or any other religious person should practice theyre faith and not worry about belittling other religions.
Canuckshousz 😍😃😄😅😁😎😚😆 that's very mature and perceptive! thanks! I am a many Gods/Goddesses believing Hindhu!... I don't worship rats!... I don't like encouraging rat population too!...they bring plague!
What i understand from that verse is that it is particularly targeted at preachers of religion. In hindu domain society is segregated by caste and several means of worship, idol worship etc. Muslims have turn to hate and punish who they see as false. So these verse are trying to irradiate those wrongs. Its Not that all people who are following religions in hind and muslim domain are making the same mistake. But majority of them. Only few understand truth and even fewer attain Bliss.
Jo James hes portraying Christian and Muslim preachers as manipulators while its merely a share of knowledge, Ive watch plenty of his Video, he does have good amount of knowledge about Sikhi but many of a time he makes up Sikhi concepts ( which aren't in reference with their scripture) to prove himself in an argument. I'd say the same for someone who is a Muslim judges and portrays preachers as manipulators with no evidence
He talks about being Gay/Les is allowed in Sikhi, and advises that one should cheat their Gay spouse while having an opposite gender spouse for reproduction.
Former atheist here, I always look for the flaws in religion. Thus far I have found none in Sikhi. Am reading the Guru Granth Sahib currently. The Abrahamic faiths I would never consider as completely true as they contain slavery. Later I began studying Buddhism and other Eastern beliefs. The Eastern religions lacked god and a meaning to life for me. Thanks for making the Sikhi videos in English or I would have missed out on learning about Sikhi.
You are welcome Mary, keep learning and may Guru bless you.
hello mary could you provide me with your email ID, i have something interesting article and pdf to share with you relating to ur comment, u can also message me at clarityispower1699@gmail.com
mary wut lol
Sheikh muhammad muhammad was a paedophile
I Jas bring your proof of you were truthful
This was absolutely brilliant!!! Thank you for sharing your wealth of knowledge on Sikhi & for being so articulate & graceful.
No brilliance
Idiot brilliance
i need to show these vids to my family you're so good
Amazing. 🙏🏼🙏🏼🙌🏼🙌🏼 The intro is UNBEATABLE!
wonderful start towards anti-conversion series,making sikhs to differtiate between their religion from others first of all...(y)
We have nothing of Sikhi in Bournemouth :-( Maybe one day a Gurdwara will grow :-)
I have an answer for the preachers when they come to the door now haha thank you !
The Concept Of Atma And Paramatma Is Thought By Krishna In Bhagvad Gita Chapter 13.... And same thing He Said Only Wise knows about soul and Supreme Soul And Only That Person attains liberation.
I read the Gita. It has great teaching. Problem with Hinduism is that everyone have a different definition of Hinduism.
Vineet yes Krishna did explained and enlightened about our soul and supreme soul ,
But here the mention is particularly referring to falsehood preached by Brahmins n pandit to segregate society, idol stone worship etc. So people in hindu domain are deviod of blissfull experience due to their preachers falsehood.
@Subhodeep Thakur so what are you doing here stay away from us
@Subho Deep Thakur you probably don't know what happend in puri.
"Gagan me thaal rav chand deepak bnee..."
These words are bitter to take for you😂
@@jsps4108 Yes . I agree . Majority of people don't know how hard it is to become a true Brahman. Brahman has the duty to preach. But today majority of them preach falsehood , rob people and the image of brahman is totally maligned. But there are still true bhakts (in kalyug becoming a bhakt and practicing bhakti is greater than becoming brahaman) for e.g Iskcon. They have still maintained truth of Sanatan dharma. God Bless!
Beautiful and informative ❤
Perfect delivery as always. Thank you very much
The pheras in a Sikh wedding are known as 'laavan' and the count to be four in number. The word 'laavan' is a spiritual term used for the union of 'Atma' (Bride) with the 'Parmatma' (Groom). Each phera has a verse associated with it which describes the various stages of the marital love and the importance of a wedding.
I think this was very informative, so keep the videos coming. As far as the versus where the Hindu is blind and the Muslim is one eyed; I don't think that was meant offended anyone, it was merely a literary allusion to show what we as Sikhs believe in compared to what other religions believe in on the basis of our teachings about believing in one God and finding God within ourselves/around. But its definitely not saying that Hindus and Muslims are blind to God, because at the end of the day we are all the same to God. Going back to the subject of Sikhs having both eyes open; not all Sikhs act the way they should therefore not having both eyes open. I know people that drink,party,have big tattoos of Kandaes and like to identify as a Sikh, but they would be considered just as blind as the Hindu.
Dude you're amazing
Wow I didn't know about this! Much thanks veer ji
Guru Gobind Singh Ji was once asked the question, "Which religion is better, yours or mine?" His response? "Tum ko tumhara khoob, hum ko hamara khoob".
Now you tell me, do we respond to a preacher by saying the Hindus are blind and the Muslims are one-eyed or do we follow the sweetness of the Guru's word?
It's not that simple brother
It's a metaphor.. It saying that hindus think only spiritually, and Muslims only think of god. Sikhs have both eyes of God and they think of spirit and God, they get the whole picture.
His references come straight from Gurbani
Hindu anna turki kana doha chon gyani siyana..It is written in sri guru granth sahab ang 875..
Sometimes child does wrong thing constantly everyday then someone can say some words to him,this words was said at that time "Hindu Anna, Turku. Kaana".
5:26. Who on earth believes that Allah almighty is living in Makkah or ka'bah?????? I think you don't understand even basics of islam.
I agree with most of things described in this video only if they are meant for creating awareness among Sikhs..
But few things which should be always kept in mind
1: It doesn't mean Sikhs who have been blessed with both eyes (according to the text shown above in SGGSJi) necessarily have their eyes open in real world too..
Therefore, Sikhs shouldn't remember this point merely for purpose of defending themselves or take pride or use this as argument to show disrespect to other religions.
Sikhs should follow this principal in their real lives as well..
2 : Every religion have certain rituals or practices ( some religions have more ,some have less)..But that doesn't mean they are wrong ..we should focus on good teachings of religious text .For example,Religious texts are like a text book of a certain subject used in various schools published under different authors but purpose is more or less same i.e complete understanding of that particular subject.. But unfortunately it doesn't mean all students who read these books will become experts in that particular subject or rather most of them will never wish to study this subject or those who wish will never fully comprehend this real message given in the book.
I believe these rituals or practices are like co-curricular activities in a school..some schools have more and others rarely imply those on their students..
But our ultimate goal as a religious student should be understanding and meditating upon the biggest truth of life i.e Almighty or Waheguru or Allah or Rama and list goes on..
Here is one example in QUOTE from very beginning of Salok mahalla 9 .
ਗੁਨ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਗਾਇਓ ਨਹੀ ਜਨਮੁ ਅਕਾਰਥ ਕੀਨੁ ॥
If you do not sing the Praises of the Lord, your life is rendered useless.
ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਹਰਿ ਭਜੁ ਮਨਾ ਜਿਹ ਬਿਧਿ ਜਲ ਕਉ ਮੀਨੁ ॥੧॥
Says Nanak, meditate, vibrate upon the Lord; immerse your mind in Him, like the fish in the water.
This is the comment I was looking for ,Totally agree with you!! You’ve brought out all the points equally
Superficiality abounds in all religion. Each religion is mutually exclusive, here's a good example: "Verily the only acceptable religion to Allah is Islam." (Quran 3:19). Guru Maharaj is telling us to rise above such foolery and accept all is an extrapolation of Sri par-Atma. Thus only that way is true which is all inclusive and open to the notion that all is 'Ik,' or one.
I would, but your desert dwelling mother prefers me the way I am.
Lol mate
Amarjeet Singh chill veere the desert may be the sikhs in the mean time if khalsa raj goes to plan 🙏🏽
What is your point , if Islam says it is the only way then you have to prove it wrong , you shouldn't judge any religion on subjective opinions
@Abu Kevin Ibn Peter yes i am on internet , what's your position about my comment ?
Really liked this video, learnt something new from it!
Thank you Veer ji for your Savaa & thank you for Teaching a Blinded like me.👳
All roads lead to the same place, some get there quicker; others enjoy the
journey and get there a little later. It is not a race, just a wonderful
experience. Remember, the holiday doesn't start when you arrive at your
destination; it begins when you lock the front door and step out into the
street.
What does the speaker mean when he says “God is inside of you”? And that Muslims don’t believe in this
What i understand from that verse is that it is particularly targeted at preachers of religion. In hindu domain society is segregated by caste and several means of worship, idol worship etc. Spirituality gets lost in these segregation. Muslims have turn to hate and punish who they see as false. Again a sign that love and mercy which is considered mother of religion is not there. So these verse are trying to irradiate those wrongs.
Its Not that all people who are following religions in hind and muslim domain are making the same mistake. But majority of them. Only few understand truth and even fewer attain Bliss.
"Muslims have turn to hate and punish who they see as false" --> but muslims lived and still live with other religions peacefully in many countries
Hi
I had a question if Sikh girls can cover their head with a dupatta if not a turban ??
Definitely yes sister
in pg 885 bani answers this question - some pray,some prostate, some worship idols,,, god is the Cause of Causes - hence all these religions exist - but sikhi is the only religion that can reveal the WILL of god to you.. it also says god is generous,, so god gave religions to all these people - but to a sikh all religion are the same because a sikh can see what these religons are and what are teaching the people.. but the supreme truth is with the sikh because the sikhs can see it all
Paaji pan Prahlada aur Hiranyakashipu mein Bhakt Prahlad ne kaha ke Vishnu saab jagah hai......aur Mahabharata mein be Virat Roop. Aur Brahmand, Antarjyothi bhi hai na.....bhas ankh band kardi🙏
One more line of guru granth sahib ji based on this topic,musalman ka ek khuda e,
Kabir ka swami rahiya smae,
Mean muslims says there is one god,but kabir realises that my god is spreaded whole over the universe like invisible curtain.🙏
thank you for this video, learned so much
very nice I have seen Sikhs who say Sikhism teaches to respect all religions which is true but they don't see that sometimes that becomes to practising those religions and islam don't seem to believe that allah lives in mecca but some muslim might then and now although most muslim do called the kaaba the house of god
Abu hafsa no only the kaaba is called the house of god and yes muslims pray in the direction of kabba but in mecca they bow down to kaaba
Abu hafsa they clearly bow down to kaaba I have seen videos of haj just like hindus bow down to their idols iand no most call the kaaba the house of god not all mosques in quran houses it is talking about is about believing muslims houses
Kabir Uddin you can stand on most idols because it would break the kaaba is strong and you can stand on it without breaking just like for muslims they bow down to the direction kaaba in the temple the hindu bow down in the direction of the idol
Kabir Uddin in temple all hindus bow down toward idol that is also unity but you say hindus are idol worshipper and are blasemphing god don't say that about hindus then or Sikhs who bow down to guru granth sahibji both religions have different interpretation when they bow down to idol or text
@@guruword8378u puddu so according to ur logic u guys worship a book 😂😂😂. Get back in ur bed
I wish there was something like this to defend the religions in India..
she was not worshipping rats she was providing milk, what's wrong in that
They drink the same bowl out of rats and they believe the rats there are a reincarnation of their goddesses
Namdev ji left this earth before appearance of guru Nanak dev ji and thus stating Namdevj and calling sikhs( belong to Sikhism) as equal to Giyani ( 2 eyes open) is foolish. If Sikhs( means religion) had 2 eyes( knowing self and glories of lord) then never had to make this anti conversion series. At that time (13 th century) Hindu means all the followers of indigenous eastern religions which also include now a day Sikhism. I may be wrong, then please correct me!!
Guru seprated the gold out of earth and included the truth only. Everyone is spiritually different, so here only those Sikhs are in reference with Gyani who have understood the message Guru wanted to deliver. Not every sikh is a Sikh from inside.
And I really can't blame those hindus who chose to be Gursikhs and leaving their rituals and superstitions. They chose their own path and so do you.
🤡
Wrong😂 pedo muslim apologist or rat worshipper
Why did it take so long for the truth to come
very good explanation khalsa g.. keep it up.
Please clarify. You say all the names of God are the same.
1) Does that mean Allah = Vishnu = Jehovah = Jesus = Akal Purakh?
2) Assuming yes to the first, does Sikhi state that the falsehood is in the teachings about these gods and the full truth is in Sikhi? For example, the Bible contains lies about Jesus Christ and his message of salvation?
I 100% agree that all people are equal. We are all one blood!
Thanks for the education. I agree that different religions have different aspects of the truth and falsehood, but at most only one can be true.
+DrFrankencelery SIkhi is the complete truth. Whatever does not tally with the truth of Sikhi is not true.. for example the one life theory, or exclusivity, or last prophethood, or theraising of the dead on judgement day.. or even the story of adam and eve...
My view is that Jesus was a saint, but that his message was not captured properly in the bible or by St Paul.
+Basics of Sikhi Thank you for the response. My questions were regarding the content of the video. It stated that it doesn't matter which name you use and where you pray. Does Sikhi teach that Jehovah = Jesus = Allah = Vishnu etc.? I don't quite understand what was meant.
+Dr Frankencelery Well lets say you use the word Vishnu to refer to ALmighty God, then its fine, but if you use it to refer to the Sustainer deity, and also then believe in Brahma and Shiva, then you're still lost at lower levels. If you say Jesus and mean God, then thats find but if you believe that he is the only form of God on earth, then you're again stuck in exclusiveness. Calling Gods name is a must, but it must be for God, not someone else
+Basics of Sikhi Thanks for the clarification. That makes more sense than what the video seemed to be saying.
Not related to the video but more so your comment:
Of course, being stuck in exclusiveness isn't a bad thing. All religions and non-religions are exclusive; they only include what is considered "true" and exclude was is considered false.
@ArraaBBee 0007 Say that to a nihung singh you coward, you'll be keeping your mouth shut then lmfao
Hinduism is such a lovely relegion
Great video
5:40
Saying the Hindu has no understanding of the atma is a laughable statement at best and all of this just because we pray or meditate in the direction of an idol ? If that were true then the concept of "bhagwan" wouldn't even exist in our religious terminology , we wouldve had only the names of our deities or gods themselves . "Bhagawan" is the master of all "bhagas" of reality that can be experienced by every single "Jivatma" . It is omnipotent, omniscient and is shapeless and formless
I quote from Yajurveda, one of the Vedas:
Yajurveda, 32:3:
“There is no image of Him.”
There is no image or idol of the formless one and that is recognised by the ancient scriptures. The Vedas do not mention idol worship at all. The Mandukya Upanishad in exquisite simplicity even goes to the point of destroying all discussion of Aatma and ParamAatma. Before the SGGS was formed, this Upanishad lauded Brahman or God and spoke of the one consciousness, the one Supreme Being. And that there is nothing but God:
Ang 485:
ਸਭੁ ਗੋਬਿੰਦੁ ਹੈ ਸਭੁ ਗੋਬਿੰਦੁ ਹੈ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਬਿਨੁ ਨਹੀ ਕੋਈ ॥
सभु गोबिंदु है सभु गोबिंदु है गोबिंद बिनु नही कोई ॥
Sabẖ gobinḏ hai sabẖ gobinḏ hai gobinḏ bin nahī ko▫ī.
God is everything, God is everything. Without God, there is nothing at all.
The Upanishads laud the one eternal Being that resides within and out. In fact, the Upanishads destroy the boundary itself of "within" and "without". The Upanishads speak of the concept of an individual which they consider the sense of separation from God. In the same way, that the Guru speaks of "haumai" or "ego".
Another beautiful example of this concept is Ahaṁ Brahmāsmīti (अहं ब्रह्मास्मीति)
I am Brahman or "I am the Infinite Reality" or "I am the Ultimate". It is one of the four Mahavakyas used to explain the unity of macrocosm and microcosm.
This memorable expression appears in the Brihadaranyaka Upanishad when the sage, in the context of meditation on the Self, in reply to the query - What did that Brahma know by which It became all? - states:-
"ब्रह्म वा इदमग्र आसीत्, तदात्मनामेवावेत्, अहं ब्रह्मास्मीति | तस्मात्तत्सर्वमभवत्; तद्यो यो देवानां प्रत्यबुध्यत स एव तदभवत्, तदषीर्णाम् तथा मनुष्याणाम्,..."
"This (self) was indeed Brahma in the beginning; It knew only Itself as, "I am Brahma". Therefore It became all; and whoever among the gods knew It also became That; and the same with sages and men…” - (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad I.iv.10)
In his comment on this passage Sankara explains that here Brahman is not the conditioned Brahma (saguna), that a transitory entity cannot be eternal, that knowledge about Brahma, the infinite all-pervading entity, has been enjoined, that knowledge of unity alone dispels ignorance and that the meditation based on resemblance is only an idea. He also tells us that the expression Aham Brahmaasmi is the explanation of the mantra -
पूर्णमदः पूर्णमिदं पूर्णात्पूर्णमुदच्यते |
पूर्णस्य पूर्णमादाय पूर्णमेवावशिष्यते ||
"That ('Brahma') is infinite, and this ('universe') is infinite; the infinite proceeds from the infinite. (Then) taking the infinitude of the
infinite ('universe'), it remains as the infinite ('Brahma') alone." - (Brihadaranyaka Upanishad V.i.1)
He explains that unity and plurality are contradictory only when applied to the Self, which is eternal and without parts, but not to the effects, which have parts. The aham in this memorable expression is not closed in itself as a pure mental abstraction but it is radical openness. Between Brahma and aham-brahma lies the entire temporal universe experienced by the ignorant as a separate entity (duality)
I honestly have a lot of respect for you man and i want you to only speak the truth as you always have and to speak the truth one must have a better understanding of the truth.
Then worship sumpreme instead of stones or deties etc etc ....for Instance don't waste milk on shiv linga rather give it to needy shiv will be bless you ....yes if you want to give respect to Shiva you may do Abhishek with your pure thoughts or bhakti instead of milk curd ghee shakar etc etc
Shalok you are quoting form Vedas is not from Hindu
It is from Sanatan ..and is truth but unfortunately I failed to understand why Sanatan dharm devides humans into 4 races and why shrudra has been given lowest status and behavior accordingly after all they are also humans ...Guru sahib considers Manas Ji jaat sab ek pachaneo .. waheguru Ji
@@Gurpreetsingh-ro6fz are you have stupid? Lmao
It is incredulous of you to suggest that the word "gyani" is a synonym for a Sikh. This is not a matter of opinion. This is factually incorrect. A gyani in the context in which the word is being used here refers to a enlightened man. An enlightened man can be a pir, a wandering sannyasi or a pandit. To suggest that a Sikh should volley a response back at preachers which calls Muslims one-eyed and Hindus blind is woefully misguided. Naam Dayv is mocking the manner in which Hindus and Muslims are practicing their faith. He is categorically not disparaging either the Hindu or the Muslim way.
In the same shabad from which this Bani is quoted, Naam Dayv says:
ਹਿੰਦੂ ਪੂਜੈ ਦੇਹੁਰਾ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਣੁ ਮਸੀਤਿ ॥
हिंदू पूजै देहुरा मुसलमाणु मसीति ॥
Hinḏū pūjai ḏehurā musalmāṇ masīṯ.
The Hindu worships at the temple, the Muslim at the mosque.
ਨਾਮੇ ਸੋਈ ਸੇਵਿਆ ਜਹ ਦੇਹੁਰਾ ਨ ਮਸੀਤਿ ॥੪॥੩॥੭॥
नामे सोई सेविआ जह देहुरा न मसीति ॥४॥३॥७॥
Nāme so▫ī sevi▫ā jah ḏehurā na masīṯ. ||4||3||7||
Naam Dayv serves that Lord, who is not limited to either the temple or the mosque
By extension, your implication suggests that Naam Dayv excludes Sikhs because they go to the Gurdwara to worship God. Naam Dayv would mock the everyday Sikh in much the same manner as he has done the Muslim and the Hindu of those times. To suggest otherwise is nothing but rabble-rousing.
You quite rightly rebuke the state of the Sikh Panth but feel at ease to say "the Sikhs have got both eyes open".
From Guru Arjan Devi Ji, Ang 266:
ਸਰਬ ਧਰਮ ਮਹਿ ਸ੍ਰੇਸਟ ਧਰਮੁ ॥
सरब धरम महि स्रेसट धरमु ॥
Sarab ḏẖaram mėh saresat ḏẖaram.
Of all religions, the best religion
ਹਰਿ ਕੋ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਿ ਨਿਰਮਲ ਕਰਮੁ ॥
हरि को नामु जपि निरमल करमु ॥
Har ko nām jap nirmal karam.
is to chant the Name of the Lord and maintain pure conduct.
This is precisely what Naam Dayv meant. The instruction from your Master, the Guru Granth Sahib, is to reject any utterly useless discussion of comparing faiths and to sing the Name of the Lord.
***** I have not completely missed the point at all. I have pointed out a factual inaccuracy which was the crux of my post which you have not addressed at all. Instead, the bulk of your post is arguing against a phantom point and is contextually misplaced as well. I said:
"Naam Dayv would mock the everyday Sikh in much the same manner as he has done the Muslim and the Hindu of those times"
I referenced the "everyday Sikh". "Everyday" as in the adjective of the common, ordinary man who claims to be practising Sikhi today. I did NOT say Naam Dayv would mock the values and teachings of the faith. With the greatest of respect, you've misread what I have written and implied instead a misunderstanding on my behalf. The everyday Sikh of today is not even familiar with the word meditation let alone is he a practitioner of it. The Sikh Panth has drifted from the Guru in the same manner as the Hindus and the Muslims have moved away from the teachings of their religions. So just as I said in my original post, Naam Dayv was mocking the manner in which "religious people" were practising their faiths. And sadly, the Sikh Panth is no different.
I have no inclination whatsoever to compare faiths or the perspective mainstream Sikhs versus Hindus and Muslims so I offer no comment on that portion of your post. Unless you're quoting me from the Guru, I have nothing of value to opine.
*****
And lastly, the final line of your post agrees wholly with the statement I made in my original post. You said:
"This path has been alive since time began but the people lost their ways. All the Gurus', Bhagats and Bhatt were above religion."
I had said:
"It is incredulous of you to suggest that the word "gyani" is a synonym for a Sikh. This is not a matter of opinion. This is factually incorrect. A gyani in the context in which the word is being used here refers to a enlightened man. An enlightened man can be a pir, a wandering sannyasi or a pandit."
Gurus, Bhagats, Bhatts... All fit the definition of a "gyani" in this context. So although you say I completely missed the point, your sentiment is in actuality rather similar to mine.
***** Yes, our definition of a Sikh is certainly different. Your definition also differs from Jagraj Singh if you've watched his recent videos. You are also probably discarding the majority of the Sikh Panth with your definition.
If you think a baptised Sikh becomes a Sikh of the Guru who lives a perfect lifestyle then we are from different worlds. The Sikh Panth is run by people who fit your definition of a Sikh and look at the state it is in... Naam Dayv would criticise the Sikhs of today, baptised or not, in much the same way. I'm only speaking from experience here. I do not know where you are from but come down to Park Avenue Gurdwara in Southall and we can speak to hundreds of baptised Sikhs - old and young. Meditation is associated with Yogis for them. If you tell them, you can experience God, they will think you are a madman. I am not exaggerating here. I use my words literally, not figuratively.
Nobody here is criticising a Sikh of the shabad. I squarely said the Sikh Panth of today fall into the same category as the one-eyed Muslims and the blind Hindus that Naam Dayv referred to in his mocking summation of their ways. Just like the thread of the brahman was criticised, the kirpan of the Sikh is criticised where it is worn ceremonially and with no regard for Bani. There is no difference whatsoever.
The Gurus rejected the lifestyle of the renunciate - they did not say you could not be a liberated man if you did happen to be a sannyasi. That's something you are saying. Was Ramana Maharshi not liberated because he didn't live the life of a householder? In the same way that you say a pandit or a pir cannot be liberated, do the misguided Muslims claim Islam is the only way to God. A true pandit has discovered the gold of the Upanishads and the Vedas. A true pir sees God in everyone.
For you, these are perhaps not the opinions of a Sikh and so I can only say we are looking in different directions. I did not mean to dispute points of merit; my intention was to only preserve the context of the shabad and prevent it from being interpreted in the manner in which it has in this video. I reiterate, a "gyani" is in no way a synonym for a "Sikh" as used in this video. If you do not believe me, I encourage you to seek the educated second-opinion of a Sikh scholar - someone cognisant of Sanskrit ideally.
And while we are on the topics of definitions, they are only ever sweet to me when they come from my Master.
Guru Amar Das Ji, Ang 601:
ਸੋ ਸਿਖੁ ਸਖਾ ਬੰਧਪੁ ਹੈ ਭਾਈ ਜਿ ਗੁਰ ਕੇ ਭਾਣੇ ਵਿਚਿ ਆਵੈ ॥
सो सिखु सखा बंधपु है भाई जि गुर के भाणे विचि आवै ॥
So sikẖ sakẖā banḏẖap hai bẖā▫ī jė gur ke bẖāṇe vicẖ āvai.
He alone is a Sikh, a friend, a relative and a sibling, who walks in the Way of the Guru's Will.
jasvir17 Please be aware that two different Gurbani quotes were used. First by Namdev ji, secondly by Guru Nanak Dev ji.. Neither of them was used to refer to a Sikh but to what the ideal of the "religion" is... here in SIkhi, it would be a BrahmGiani, or as Guru Nanak Dev ji says, "aap pachaane, boojhe soe" and in that context, it fits the idea of having two eyes open. Your other points are valid of course. Have you seen our video "what is a Sikh" in the one day course?
Although i don't agree ..hindu lack parmantma but i accept his point of view
I don't think worshipping idols of gods makes you to not see him. IDOL WORSHIP in some case is the most beautiful thing.
Pharside-Runin'
Love that song.
waheguru g🙏🙏🙏
Ekam Saat vipra bahuda vadanti the rig Veda says truth is one people worship him in many ways it is not good to condem others faith
There's particularly no difference between Sanatan Dharma and Sikhi...Aatma, Parmatma, sva-gyan, karma, Samsara, moksha: Aatma ka Parmatma mei milan... These concepts are all and one.. Sikhi is the modified, refined form of Sanatani.. removing aadambar, jati pati bhed, andhvishwas. Jai Guru Nanak Dev Maharaj Ji 🙏🙏🙏
Yes exactly! There is no need to care about these differences just choose which path helps you get rid of haumai/ego the best who cares about what the religion is called. Sikhi is just a more modern take of the path of bhagti from Hinduism.
Agar apna banda singh bhadur ya baba deep singh ya chaar sahibzade ka example diya hota to logo sikhism ke bare mai zayda achi traha pta chalta
Actually that is not completely correct as if you read the sufism and the big scholars like ibn e arabi , Rumi and many more you will find that they all were trying to see inside ,even the sufism is all about seeing inside
I am not defending but because it is true that is why i am saying so
Sufis can not conquer death because they don't have amrit. So they remain in Maya (delusion).And die repentant. NO ONE CAN MEET WAHEGURU WITHOUT SURRENDERING BEFORE GURU NANAK DEV JI MAHARAJ .SURRENDERING MEANS TAKING AMRIT. THERE IS NO OTHERWAY TO WAHEGURU
@@amarpalkaur2385 No one can conquer death and no one could so far
death is the absolute truth of this world
@@shakebahmad9601 it's not that,ur body shall not die,it's the fear of death which is conquered,many examples in Sikh history.
Love you veerji
anounaki point no.1 - matha tek- the sangat (devotees) who visit the the gurdwara are considered as the light of the guru ''vich sangat har prabh vasse jio'' every sikh touches the floor of the gurdwara because the take the dust of the sangats feet so that they throw their egotism and take the guru's blessings of being humble.
point no.2- the word GURU means GU: from darkness RU: to light and your claim on sanskrit is false because the guru granth sahib ji is written in gurumukhi script but has various languages in it - punjabi, awadhi, magadhi, sankrit , persian ,marathi, dakhni oankar so that guru sahib could make it easily accessible and understandable for the common man .''language is mean of communication , through which people communicate , the more important point or context is what person is saying rather than in what language he is saying , for example if I m telling someone in begali , who doesn't knows hindi or English to explain him content , dosent means I m steeling''
point 3. sikh never lost their land , maharaja ranjit singh won all the land till afghanistan and a hindu minister he trusted betrayed him. also in 1947 it was jawah lal nehru who used his dumbness to give away land and now because of stupid decision people in gujrat punjab and jammu kashmir face turmoil everyday , but sikh men stand at the border ready to give their life because they dont care which religion you belong to , more than 60% of armed forces is filled with sikhs that the greatness guru gobind singh ji gave us
You should first throw your ego away, people from last 3 yugas are continuously living in this land and claiming it because once sikh( not the actual meaning) empire was there is very foolish. A real sikh already gives his/her head to guru and they feel grateful for this opportunity but never heard of them showing off to public like many fake foolish( hopefully they learn in future) now do.
with all respect and admire your bravery , but i found you guilty when you talk about muslims making sajda to mecca , which is not true , mecca is only a direction when we muslims make sajda towards , so i will take you as an arrogant man and having propaganda for misleading people of the misinformtion of the islam and its faith .
आप अपनेस्वार्थ के लिए झूठ फैला रहे हो
अगर हिंदू अंधे हे तो ये आत्मा और परमात्मा शब्द कहा से आया बताओ
Mere bhai pehle Gurbani ka matlab smj lena phir comment krna . Sikh Gurus love every religion
No one:
Muslims: ok prove it 🤡
God is not inside every human being! That is a massive contradiction to make. So if we go by this logic, a rapist has God inside him, so how do you classify that then? Its absurd. Muslims believe in a soul and a judgement day that all souls will be held accountable for their deeds. You have freewill on earth to do what you like, right or wrong but you will be held accountable.
The soul of a rapist is covered with maya and ego , if the soul was to be cleaned then yes he could embody god
@@HS-lz8jg There is no logical explanation for this. Its a belief. The concept of "Godly men" is against monotheism. Just like saying Jesus PBUH was God's son.
The sullah strikes again
WE KNOW GOD IS INFINITE AND INCONCEIVABLE TO HUMAN MIND AND AT THE SAME TIME HE IS FINITE AND VERY CONCEIVABLE TO HUMAN MIND... DUALITY... IDOL WORSHIP BRINGS YOU TO THIS SECOND NATURE OF GOD WHERE WE THINK LOOKING TO THE VERY IDOL THAT HE IS CONCEIVABLE AND FINITE AND THEN THE MOST BEAUTIFUL THINGS START TO HAPPEN...WE TRY TO RELATE TO GOD AS IF HE IS AMONG US LIKE OUR FRIEND OR TEACHER OR PARENT OR LOVER.
well actually in islam.. the disbeliever is one eyed not the muslims.. research islam and find out who "dajjal" is
@@johnsydney100 dont disrespect a prophet brother. You listen somewhere and just talk random shit. Guru Nanak rejects the concept of pleasing people with moracles.
@@johnsydney100 baba gurunanak did just roadside mirscle between him and bhai mardana there is no witness of these miracle plz must watch this video comolete
Then answer me respect to all
ruclips.net/video/0fetbRkZLd0/видео.html
@@johnsydney100 do i abused gurunanak like you brother this is not my training plz correct yourself
@Abu Kevin Ibn Peter
Very good dear. I like your question and comments.
The miracle of miraj is mentioned in quran.
Chapter no 17 verse no 1.
Second. When prophet muhammad told this event to the people of Macca they laughed and make fun of them. The only person was abubakar friend of prophet who believed.
People of mecca asked what did he see in jeroshilm masjid. Prophet told each and every thing in masjid Aqsa. Then they believed and embrace islam .
Third .
The animal was not donky. It was creature of light barak . Barak arabic means light.
Fourth
The purpose of this journy was that God showed the last prophet heaven and hell ho justify the claim of qursn
That who will believe one God and his angels heaven and hell and all his prophet from adam to muhammad and believe judgement day and do good deeds.
Your story is entirly different and unbelieveable. during all miracle of guru nanak no single person converted to sikh totally aimless.
Fifth.
Quran challanged the entireminkind. If you believe that this quran is not from God then produce a verse like quran
﷽
. Al Quran.
Sura baqra No 2.
Verse No. 23.
And if you are in doubt about what We have sent down upon Our Prophet [Muhammad], then produce a surah the like thereof and call upon your witnesses other than Allah, if you should be truthful.
But if you dont and you will not be able to then fear the fire whose fuel is men and stone, prepared for the disbelievers.
Sixth Quran claim only truth and prove its claim
Sura Al Ahzaab No 33.
Verse No. 40.
Muhammad is not at all a father to any one male among you but he is the last Messenger of Allah and is the final of the prophets.
Sura Aale Imran No. 3
Verse No. 85.
And whose seek any other religion except islam it will never be accepted from him/ her and such person will be loser in the hereafter.
QURAN
Chapter 9, At-Taubah (Repentance)
Verse 32-33
At-Taubah سورة التوبة
They want to extinguish Allah's Light with their mouths, but Allah will not allow except that His Light should be perfected even though the disbelievers hate (it) (32)It is He Who has sent His Messenger with guidance and the religion of truth, to make it superior over all religions even though the idolators hate (it)
It is recorded in the Sahih that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said,
(Allah made the eastern and western parts of the earth draw near for me [to see], and the rule of my Ummah will extend as far as I saw.)
Imam Ahmad recorded from Tamim Ad-Dari that he said, "I heard the Messenger of Allah ﷺ saying,
(Islam) will keep spreading as far as the night and day reach, until Allah will not leave a house made of mud or hair, but will make this religion enter it, while bringing might to a mighty person (a Muslim) and humiliation to a disgraced person (who rejects Islam). Might with which Allah elevates Islam (and its people) and disgrace with which Allah humiliates disbelief (and its people).)
Tamim Ad-Dari [who was a Christian before Islam] used to say, "I have come to know the meaning of this Hadith in my own people. Those who became Muslims among them acquired goodness, honor and might. Disgrace, humiliation and Jizyah befell those who remained disbelievers."
"For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.
John 3:16 ESV
Jesus said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.
John 14:6 ESV
He also said Where are you God? Why have you forsaken me? Jeshua was great, but he was not complete with God. Otherwise he would never lose faith in the Lord.
@@Xx0Mystic0xX that is a misunderstanding. First, this was a real forsakenness. That is why. “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?” means he really did. He really did. He is bearing our sin. He bore our judgment.
The judgment was to have God the Father pour out his wrath, and instead of pouring it out on us, he pours it out on him. That necessarily involves a kind of abandonment. That is what wrath means. He gave him up to suffer the weight of all the sins of all of his people and the judgment for those sins.
We cannot begin to fathom all that this would mean between the Father and the Son. To be forsaken by God is the cry of the damned, and he was damned for us. So he used these words because there was a real forsakenness.
Jesus knew ahead of time what he was doing and what would happen to him and why he was doing it. His Father had sent him for this. This very moment. And he had agreed to come, knowing all that would happen.
@@johannesdewit3847 Do you believe jesus was a part of God?? That merged with eternal God???
Scripture teaches that Jesus has not merged with God; the two persons are still distinct. In fact, Jesus' role as the Son of God was declared "with power by the resurrection from the dead" (Ro 1:4). The New Testament authors are all in agreement on this, and often mention them as two separate individuals.
Always run from a guy who knows it all. This is that guy. Obsessed with religion, delusional and desperate to preach.
😂
This guy is like any other preacher who is taking literal meaning of teachings and entirely forgeting essense. Obviously he has little or no knowlege of Hinduism as well. He claims hindus dont know about "atma" which is at best laughable. Whole theory of Atms and reincarnation and Moksha is derived from Yoga in Hinduism. And if you think that doing "arti" in jaganath puri has no purpose ,so does sitting beside a book like you do in Gurudwara. This guy's heart is filled with darkness.
Darkness? What a disgusting thing to say about someone.. you should be ashamed of yourself!
@Subhodeep Thakur that's what your Hinduism taught you i can see that in your mouth
@Subhodeep Thakur some where else you just abused i can see your mother getting ashamed of you
@Subhodeep Thakur ya your mother disowned you lamo😂
@Subhodeep Thakur I M A HUMAN I AM NOT A DISOWNED CHILD OF MY MOTHER LMAO!!
Sokhism is the weakest of the major religions.
What's weak is your intellect, you can't even spell Sikhi correctly lmfao. Don't get sensitive because you can't handle the truth.
U can’t even spell bro
Yes ,because sikhism respect every religion and teach a muslim to be a true muslim and hindu to be a true hindu .
Sikh gurus and sikhs sacrificed their life for saving religion of hindu pandits and humanity.
LA ILAHA IL ALLAH MUHAMMAD UR RASUL ALLAH
EX CHRISTIAN EX SIKH AND ALHUMDULILLAH MUSLIM ☝️
EX MUSLIM AND TODAY I AM A SIKH
Horrible video and a great example of why more people chose not to believe in god. In the beginning of the video you said Hindus worships rats which is not true thats just some temples that give milk and food to rats. Video was great except you adding your opinion on others religions like Hindus cant see param aatma because they go to stones? and Us Sikhs go to books so whos to say who can see param aatma or not. I hate to say this but these new generation of Sikh guys like this guy are trying to change SIkhism and tryiing to convince you that no other religion is better and we are far superior than other religions and though that might be true why not let individuals decide or how about just stay true to your religion and stop worrying about which religion is the best. Before I get all the hate comments I am sikh and I believe we should practice Sikhism or any other religious person should practice theyre faith and not worry about belittling other religions.
Source?
Canuckshousz 😍😃😄😅😁😎😚😆 that's very mature and perceptive! thanks! I am a many Gods/Goddesses believing Hindhu!... I don't worship rats!... I don't like encouraging rat population too!...they bring plague!
Because nobody could end the cycle of birth and death before the coming of Guru Nanak?
What i understand from that verse is that it is particularly targeted at preachers of religion. In hindu domain society is segregated by caste and several means of worship, idol worship etc. Muslims have turn to hate and punish who they see as false. So these verse are trying to irradiate those wrongs.
Its Not that all people who are following religions in hind and muslim domain are making the same mistake. But majority of them. Only few understand truth and even fewer attain Bliss.
Every thing in Sikhism come from Vedas and Upanishads
Have u read vedas?
Reported hateful content
Jo James hes portraying Christian and Muslim preachers as manipulators while its merely a share of knowledge, Ive watch plenty of his Video, he does have good amount of knowledge about Sikhi but many of a time he makes up Sikhi concepts ( which aren't in reference with their scripture) to prove himself in an argument. I'd say the same for someone who is a Muslim judges and portrays preachers as manipulators with no evidence
He talks about being Gay/Les is allowed in Sikhi, and advises that one should cheat their Gay spouse while having an opposite gender spouse for reproduction.
Jo James which is again not in Sikhi scriptures
I Jas i think you don't know the meaning of proof
Sheikh Muahmmed Haroon truth hurts the butt of paedophile worshippers.