-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Confused about Sikhism/Hinduism differences
- Thread starter ronki23
- Start date
ronki23
Well-Known Member
Yes but as i've stated before, it's always Hindus visiting Gurudwara and never the other way around!
Hindus convert to Sikhism from the British rewarding Sikhs more due to their war efforts.
Sikhs accept all yet on many websites and facebook group they complain if a Sikh and non-Sikh marry in Gurudwara. It may not be important for the non-Sikh but the Sikh has every right to marry in front of Sri Guru Granth Sahib
and the article I provided is not malicious, but it is written by a Sikh.
On an unrelated matter. Bhai Mardana and Guru Nanak's wife were Muslim and Guru Gobind Singh fought Hindus so Muslims also have an input into Sikhism.
Is Wahabbism and Shia fundementalism stopping the friendship between Sikhs and Muslims? Because Sikhs allegedly get along fine in Pakistan and Afghanistan.
I never see Sikhs and Muslims pray together and I never see Sikhs visit Mandir (except the guy who may or may not be a Sikh in my local).
Sri Guru Granth Sahib:
Aurangzeb! I did not know that you are a perjurer; that you are mere worshipper of wealth and breaker of your faith.
You neither follow the teachings of Islam nor you understand its meaning. You do not know the ways of the Lord nor do you have any faith in the Prophet Mohammed.
Any believer of his faith, will not look here and there (while fulfilling) his own promises.
This man (Aurangzeb) who swears by the Koran as well as by One God, cannot be trusted even equivalent of a speck of sand.
(So now) if you swear hundred times on the Koran, I do not have trust in you even equivalent to a drop of water.
and why do Sikhs not follow Ravidas? Why are they also closed to Shirdi Sai Baba? Are some religions not open to evolution? Although Satnam makes a very good point about them wanting to preserve their original religion.
Remember, Jainism and Buddhism are not Hinduism but assimilated into it. The Sikhs have every right to keep Sikhism alive. I think the Rehat Maryada has perhaps made Sikhism too strict?
Last edited:
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
ronki23
Well-Known Member
Assume religions put in these 'safety measures' to avoid people claiming to be enlightened? Like with Shias and Ali?
It's strange, Hinduism claims Sikhism,Buddhism and Jainism as they believe in reincarnation,karma and dharma but Sikhs and Buddhists deny they are a branch of Hinduism due to not following Vedas
at the same time Nihangs adopt a chand tora of Shiva and Durga and they utilise Hindu symbolism and terminology.
It fascinates me- three Guru's sons chose Hinduism but plenty of websites attack Hinduism due to 1984. Do they know they're insulting their own religions' founders family?
and insulting either Hinduism or Islam is silly as Sri Guru Granth Sahib utilises the positives of each of these religions
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
But they don't. They are just not the gurus of the Sikhs.
So why would they?
ronki23
Well-Known Member
But the Ravidasis believe Ravidas ji is a guru. And what I meant by that post was that Muslims say
محمد ليس والد أي من رجالكم، ولكن (هو
رسول الله، وخاتم النبيين: والله لديه المعرفة الكاملة لجميع الأمورand Sikhs say
ਸਾਰੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਨੂੰ ਗੁਰੂ ਦੇ ਤੌਰ ਤੇ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਲੈਣ ਲਈ ਹੁਕਮ ਦਿੱਤਾ ਗਿਆ ਹੈ
so are these said safety measures? To avoid people in this modern era to claim they're divine?
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
That has never stopped anyone from making the claim, be it Joseph Smith, be it Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, or be it Bahaullah.
ronki23
Well-Known Member
The latter 2 aren't that bad though. They try to amalgamate religions.
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
I don't speak these languages.But the Ravidasis believe Ravidas ji is a guru. And what I meant by that post was that Muslims say
محمد ليس والد أي من رجالكم، ولكن (هو
and Sikhs say
ਸਾਰੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਨੂੰ ਗੁਰੂ ਦੇ ਤੌਰ ਤੇ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਲੈਣ ਲਈ ਹੁਕਮ ਦਿੱਤਾ ਗਿਆ ਹੈ
ronki23
Well-Known Member
Google translate
ronki23
Well-Known Member
modern day Sai Baba too. Ahmadiyaas,Sufis,Bahais are all good people. Not keen on Sai Baba or Smith
Nyingjé Tso
Dharma not drama
Tu sais Ronki, c'est aussi une marque de respect dans un débat de faire un effort pour le faire avancer et pour la compréhension de l'autre. Google translate traduit souvent très mal, et c'est pour ça, je pense, que Breathe aurait aimé que tu traduise ces phrases de manière à ce qu'elles soient compréhensives à tout le monde, étant donné que tu parles ces langues, pas lui, mais que ce débat vous concerne tout les deux.
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
Fine. It would have been better for you to have provided the English, at least, seeing as this is an English speaking board.
Muslims believe in no prophets after Muhammad. Muslims do not believe in avatars.
Sikhs have no gurus but the gurus of the past, with their current guru for eternity (the Granth). Sikhs do not believe in avatars.
So they don't because they don't believe it.
Why would they accept something that they don't believe?
It's that simple.
Oui, précisément.
Or something. I don't speak French either...
ronki23
Well-Known Member
Fine. It would have been better for you to have provided the English, at least, seeing as this is an English speaking board.
Muslims believe in no prophets after Muhammad. Muslims do not believe in avatars.
Sikhs have no gurus but the gurus of the past, with their current guru for eternity (the Granth). Sikhs do not believe in avatars.
So they don't because they don't believe it.
Why would they accept something that they don't believe?
It's that simple.
Oui, précisément.
Or something. I don't speak French either...
That's the whole question- do religions put these 'safety measures' in to stop others from claiming divinity?
Because Shias believe in Muhammad's succession and Ali,Ahmadiyaas in Mirza Ghulam Ahmed, Ravidas believe in Ravidas Ji, Mormons believe in Joseph Smith, Bahais in Bahullah and Hindus in either of the Sai Babas or Vivekananda and these are not 'true' Muslims/Christians/Hindus according to the majority's governing bodies.
and I am not a Muslim (people have accused me of being one) but I have no issue with Shirdi Sai Baba being one and it doesn't make me think any less of him. As a matter of fact, I wonder why Sikhs do not follow him as he has many similarities with Guru Nanak.
Is it because of said 'safety measures' in religions? Because even many Hindus do not believe in him or associate him with Satya Sai Baba and Muslims do not glorify anyone post Muhammed full stop (though some do e.g Shia and Indian Muslims believe in Sai Baba but they are not 'Sunni')
Last edited:
Sb1995
Om Sai Ram
[youtube]FLgecEo9hBQ[/youtube]
Sathya Sai Baba Bhajans by HIS Arab Devotees from the Middle Eastern Countries Part -1 - YouTube
@Ronki
Sathya Sai Baba Bhajans by HIS Arab Devotees from the Middle Eastern Countries Part -1 - YouTube
@Ronki
ronki23
Well-Known Member
1. Not all Arabs are Muslim. Consider the amount of Indian workers in the Middle East and Arab Christians
2. "There is no god but God, Muhammad is the messenger of God (and Ali is the wali of God)" Sunni (Shia). How can these be Muslims? Unless they're a new sect?
3. Are you really going to use Sathya Sai Baba? Related to point #2, even Hindus doubt the divinity of him. Shirdi Sai Baba is a good man though (the only controversy he was involved with was meat eating or following Islam)
Last edited:
ronki23
Well-Known Member
Strange, I thought Sikhs do not do Aarti but this image is from Hazur Sahib Nanded
this is from another Gurudwara but they seem to be Nihangs
I heard Nirmala and Udaisis were in control of Gurudwaras for a while and Banda Singh Bahadur followers thought he was the 11th Guru. So if these 3 things, particularly the Udaisis (the sons of 3 Gurus) and Banda Singh Bahadur, were a huge part of Sikh history, perhaps Sanatan Sikhism is not as uncommon as one may think and this 1984 business should not be viewed so black and white then (after all, as the Sikh majority themselves know, Operation Blue Star had Sikh armymen involved and they hate KPS Gill who is a Sikh).
So I can see where the Hindus are coming from with their belief that Sikhs are a branch. Though the Sri Guru Granth Sahib begs to differ but still, it's all too convenient that 3 sons of the Gurus chose Hinduism
Also I heard that before 1984 there were paintings and Murtis of Hindu Gods in Harmandir Sahib? Any evidence of this? I heard Murtis were removed near the end of British rule in India but the paintings and carvings remained until 1984 as they were part of the architecture????
this is from another Gurudwara but they seem to be Nihangs
I heard Nirmala and Udaisis were in control of Gurudwaras for a while and Banda Singh Bahadur followers thought he was the 11th Guru. So if these 3 things, particularly the Udaisis (the sons of 3 Gurus) and Banda Singh Bahadur, were a huge part of Sikh history, perhaps Sanatan Sikhism is not as uncommon as one may think and this 1984 business should not be viewed so black and white then (after all, as the Sikh majority themselves know, Operation Blue Star had Sikh armymen involved and they hate KPS Gill who is a Sikh).
So I can see where the Hindus are coming from with their belief that Sikhs are a branch. Though the Sri Guru Granth Sahib begs to differ but still, it's all too convenient that 3 sons of the Gurus chose Hinduism
Also I heard that before 1984 there were paintings and Murtis of Hindu Gods in Harmandir Sahib? Any evidence of this? I heard Murtis were removed near the end of British rule in India but the paintings and carvings remained until 1984 as they were part of the architecture????
Last edited:
Aupmanyav
Be your own guru
Not Nihangs. Nihangs wear Blue or Black turbans (as far as I know).
Yes, there were paintings and idols of Hindu Gods at various gurudwaras earlier. But now they have fallen prey to politics. You might find something interesting at https://www.google.co.in/search?q=H...gLYLqrAeay4GgDQ&ved=0CEwQsAQ&biw=1600&bih=775
Last edited:
ronki23
Well-Known Member
I wrote about the Nihangs with regards to picture 2
and the point is that aarti is a Hindu ritual but it shows Sikhs doing it, in a prominent Gurudwara may I add.
R.e. the murtis and the paintings, was there really a need to put that link up? Lol-it's the first thing I looked up alone and i'm finding no proof except articles written by Hindus/ analysed by members of Sikh Sangat who say that there's no proof.
Not to mention the Udasi and Nirmalas DID control the Gurudwaras but if Blue Star was 'recent' in 1984, i'm sure there must have been photographs from before this. All I can see nowadays in modern photographs are Surajbaba/ Sun engravings in the Golden Temple.
I was told there were specific paintings of Sikh Gurus and Hindu Gods before Blue Star. I can understand if the Murtis were taken away when the Gurudwara reform act came into play but i'm sure they must have been sent somewhere else as Sikhs can't have hated Hindus in those days too that they would've destroyed it. It must have been quite valuable.
Also Sikhi is not only Hindu influenced so as there were 2 Muslim authors of the Guru Granth Sahib, wouldn't this also mean the Gurudwaras would include calligraphy like
الله