User Name:


FAQ Donate Join

Comparative Religion

dear Mark loewe and all atheists,<br /> i visited your website to give you the facts about my religion Sikhism. Apparently you atheists do not know enough about it. Did you know that they believed in Democracy, freedom of speech, choice, expression, freedom of religion, pluralism, human rights, equality between men and women, equality of all people regardless of race, religion, caste, creed, status etc. 300 years before the existance of the USA! Theirs is the only religion which says in their religious scriptures that women are equal in every respect to men. They even had women soldiers leading armies in to battle against "you know who" (The usual suspects - Muslims!) Their history is a proud one, they fought in both World Wars. Even Hitler praised them for their bravery and Aryan heritage! Dear Ali, this religion is hard for us to try and criticise but you are an expert and may find some faults overlooked by us. In their holy book, there is a round earth, water is made from chemical elements, there is even mention of the evoution process, big bang and life on other planets! This is pretty crazy and amazing stuff. We read up some information of what Bertrand Russell had to say about Sikhism, this is the man who destroyed Christianity (same applies to Islam and Judaism) and exposed its absurdities, but even this great man got stuck when it came to Sikhism! In fact he gave up and said "that if some lucky men survive the onslaught of the third world war of atomic and hydrogen bombs, then the Sikh religion will be the only means of guiding them. Russell was asked that he was talking about the third world war, but isn't this religion capable of guiding mankind before the third world war? In reply, Russell said, "Yes, it has the capability, but the Sikhs have not brought out in the broad daylight, the splendid doctrines of this religion which has come into existence for the benefit of the entire mankind. This is their greatest sin and the Sikhs cannot be freed of it." <br /> <br /> Please bear in mind that Bertrand Russell was a great philosopher and free thinker. We have been trying for weeks now to find a way to fairly and rationally criticize and find fault with this religion but have failed. We even found out that there are many people converting to this religion in the USA and Europe as well as Russia (Mostly well educated and affluent white people). We tried to find some of their literature and see what kind of claims they make, but unfortunatley they have no missionary material as they do not have missionsaries! People become Sikh by learning usually by chance or by coming in to contact with them. They are currently the 5th biggest religion in the world and growing quite fast in the west and Russia. Please help us as we are stuck, to give you an example of they are all about we found the following websites: (This is a pretty good site and helpful) (This site is very easy to follow, check it out, they have a Womans section and a Martyrs section, it looks like that you are not the only one trying to expose the falseness of Islam, Sikhs scholars did it hundreds of years ago and got killed for it!) (This is the site that was on CNN when Sikhs in the USA were mistaken for Arabs and Middle Easterners and were attacked by mindless morons) <br /> <br /> Please help us out, we cant make our website about religion being the cause of war and disharmony when we have this one and only religion which makes a hell of a lot of sense! lol (I thought Atheism had all the answers but were kind of stuck now.) We look forward to hearing from you, we respect your great views and want to promote them to everyone, thank you for your time, take care. <br /> <br /> this was taking from

Hello, Jeevan,<br /> I don't have any problem rejecting Sikhism. Sikhism is a theistic religion, with a supernatural god as its centerpiece; a god which, in my opinion, does not exist (except as a concept). I am an atheist, and do not accept that Sikhism is superior in any way to any other religion/scam.<br /> <br /> Also, I rather like Bertrand Russell. Are you sure you are quoting him accurately? Please provide a non-Sikh source so that I may verify it. Please understand, sometimes religious people think it's OK to lie to promote their particular bucket of dogma. Of course, I'm sure you wouldn't do that, but please provide the source just the same.

Actually the quote from Bertrand Russell does come from a non-sikh source. It is from a site that promotes humanistic views of thinking (which by the way sikhism does too). In fact Bertrand Russell even complained that Sikhs don't try to convert people and that they should!! Anyway, yes, Sikhs believe in God but that God is truth, as in all human beings who serve humanity are God. Sikhism does not have a heaven and hell. Truthful living means you are in heaven and living off of the blood and sweat of another means you are in hell. Sikhism does not believe in offense. Even in the battles that occurred Sikhs were never ever the first to attack. I'm not trying to convert anyone I just don't like my belief being called a scam, in fact I'd prefer it if no religion was called a scam. No one's belief is superior to anyone else's and by calling religion a scam you are yourself turning atheism into a belief that is the only way which would make you a hypocrite because basically you are doing exactly what many religious people do. It took me a lot of searching to finally accept Sikhism and I'm sure it must have taken you a lot of searching to find atheism. Sikhs don't look for converts, just understanding.

Well put mkaur! I think most of the WORLD would agree to your comments. The critics have their own personal doubts, like all of us - we're all human, but sooner or later they'll understand. Two problems arise when they try to publicize these doubts: 1)they become hypocrites by turning atheism into a 'my way or the highway' belief and 2)they're essentially trying to do missionary work (mental rather than physical) by taking advantage of others who are going through their own spiritual journey (with their own doubts) to agree with them. Shame, shame, shame.

PS - Jainism is an atheistic religion.

Can you give me the reference of a book, magazine, etc, written by Burtrand Russell, where I can read by myself what is claimed to be written or said by Burtrand Russell?

Similarly, there is a claim being made that H.L. Bradshaw has written something similar about Sikhism. We need to be very specific and particular in providing the reference material published by the person being referred. Without such a reference, what is being presented would simply be ignored by a educated person as a mere gossip.

Please respond using my e-mail :

LOL@ DON! You have said You can reject Sikhism because you reject God! It is like saying I reject education because I reject School Board. The School is in your community! Board is not seen but has a very well run school.

They say pigeons close their eyes when they see a cat. Someone asked a pigeon why do you guys do that? Pigeon said that we are all taught that at the young age that if you close your eyes then you don't see the cat. AND If you don't see the cat the cat doesn't see you! WOW! Don! You reject God and God doesn't exist.

Dear Mr. Jeevan Singh,<br /> <br /> That religious people have been brilliant and wonderful and virtuous people, this, I never did doubt. :) What I question is the objective effect of a belief in an afterlife. <br /> <br /> There appears to be a connection between war and belief in an afterlife. We have letters from Roman times, for example, cold-bloodedly noting how fiercely the Jews fight, and attributing this directly to their strong afterlife belief. There are even theories that Christianity was deliberately fostered and encouraged by the Roman Emperors because it could make suicidal troops out of people born of any nationality (and not just Hebrews).<br /> <br /> Peace and equality do not follow automatically follow from Atheism, but many Atheists have also been "Freethinkers" and "Pacifists". Therefore, my activities as an activist for peace are directed through an organization called<br /> <br /> There you will also find Witches who follow the Great Goddess and the Horned One, Buddhists, Christians, Jews, Hindus, Shintoists, Taoists, Mormons, Lutherans, Presbyterians, Baptists, and many others who are opposed to the war in Iraq.<br /> <br /><br />

You certainly don't have to believe in some supernatural being to do things that are morally acceptable. You treat people with respect and dignity just because it's the right thing to do, and not because of god.

If you are a person with rationality and logic, then it sensible for you to do unto others as you would have them do unto you. It's a way for our species to co-exist and our society to function properly.

The moment you accept God is the moment you open the door for irrational things such as superstitions and magical fantasies.

People should be encourage to think critically and raise vital questions, so that they can really find the truth of our world. Blindly accepting beliefs are sometimes harmless enough but other times it's quite dangerous.

What if someone says "Kill me. It's only right."?

The truth is: Concept of right and wrong is only a mere opinion in the Atheist life. Even I can say, "Killing is wrong. But why do I kill chickens for food?"

Another, euthanasia is wrong in some countries but is ethically good to others.

Like I said, concept of right and wrong is a mere opinion because there is no absolutes.

NobodyMan said: "The truth is: Concept of right and wrong is only a mere opinion in the Atheist life. Even I can say, "Killing is wrong. But why do I kill chickens for food?"

I agree, killing chickens (or any sentient being that can feel pain) for food IS wrong. Refute it.

I'm atheist, and I love eating chicken.

Even right and wrong in religion is not absolute. How many interpretations of the bible, torah, or quran are there? Quite a few, because even within religion people disagree on what is right and wrong.

Anyways, even as an atheist being born to a multiple generation atheistic family, we have all lived normal and peaceful lives. My book on ethics is Aesop's fables, which I believe to be a good example that morality and ethics can exist regardless of religion.

Every rule of morality has its exception. For instance, I don't think anyone moral would tell the Allied veterans of world war 2 (which some of my atheist family were) that fighting the Germans was either bad or immoral. Even killing can be moral; every situation requires good judgement and rationality, not just a moral code of absolutes (and there are many religious people who agree with this idea, too, without being any less faithful to their respective religions)


i agree

hello to all..sikhism is a faith which does not believe in religeons,superstitions, neither it believes in after life or hell and just belief in present is a study of human guru granth sahib ji there are many people of differnt caste and religeon..sikhism does not belief in supernatural just believe in law of nature and everyone is bound by these laws...e.g law of gravity...take another example when we are angry there is a law in our body which will increase the adrenaline levels which can harm these laws are explained in sikhism..sikhism does not believe ib any diety or GOD which control our just explains that everyone on this earth is responsible for his own explains as you sow so shall u reap. it believes only humanism...and what the definition of GOD is given by sikhism is that it is universal truth with universal the law of nature is the will of god..

Hey jubie, times before I thought like you not to believe in god. But now I think god may exist. Their is no solid proof that god Is true or things that is good for world and everyone. This should be the main motive . and next its choice of man itself to believe in something or not. I thought there may be some super power that generated the world or the whole world may be a superpower is the way you think. No one knows he is right or wrong if he is good judge for himself.Ask yourself that you are totally right or not that there is no god!! My view about God is that we can never understand what is it if it don't want us to because it created us((if it exists)) So I just go on .. And I believe in god . if this mastermind of universe is true than it'll be good for me and if it is not than also it is not even a little bit bad for me. Thus I saved from both sides. If u want to understand what I said than sonetine u nay just sit and think deeply.

Buddhists and Taoists are two other mostly atheist religions (I say this because there are some Buddhist stories that reference supernatural beings, and a brand of Taoism that branched off into alchemy--and I can't speak for that). Both religions are also highly pacifist and fairly humanitarian. If a person is an atheist and interested in humanist goals, I don't see why it would be necessary to adopt a relgion at all. Why not just join the Humanist movement? All of the "be nice to everybody" and none of the religion.

Why not be united you say? This is why:

Men are mere beings-at-war-with-each-other. It's their nature to be corrupted.

>Why not be united you say?

This is a long thread, so maybe this wasn't in response to my post. But if it was, I didn't say that. I merely pointed out that there is a very large nonreligious humanitarian movement--if that's someone's cup of tea.

>Men are mere beings-at-war-with-each-other. It's their nature to be corrupted.

And from anything I've ever seen, it's the nature of the religions they create and the religious leaders they follow to also become corrupt--I see it all the time.

And although I don't believe in gods, the stories about them certainly don't paint them as nonwarring and incorruptable. In fact, they most often have very human flaws, often battle one another, and are severely competitive and jealous--not only of one another, but often of people as well.

SO WHAT! Anybody could come up with a better religion than "Christianity" -( a concoction with everything thrown into the wash so they can suck more people in.) Most people don't become delusional or emotional over science; the physical laws that govern the universe don't need obedience from brainwashed masses to exist.

And this is where the corrupt minds of men start to show.


Because of their want for freewill.

Yes, your corrupt mind does show. Are you looking for Sikhism?...

God is the reason for everything, and the sooner we all except that the better off this world will be. Beleive it or not there once was a time where Gods name was the truth(not sayin it still isnt the truth) and there was no violence, only peace and harmony. Every religion speaks to some extent about this peaceful time, you may be more familiar with the Christian version of, The Garden Of Eden. Same concept in sikhism, there are four stages of this earth Sathyug-Taretha-Duwhaper-Kaljug, we are currently in the final stage, and it was the great Guru Nanak Dev Ji that met Kaljug. Sikhi was created to save us from Kalyug. Humans are often blinded by their own opinions and distractions. Being a pacifist is perfectly exceptable, even the great Guru Nanak Dev Ji refused to fight, even though he was aware of all the pain and suffering in the world. However how long can pain and suffering be allowed in this world? God has created a way of balancing Kaljug with Bani, we should listen because it will set us free. Sikhism was created to free us all in essence, and gradually all 10 Guru braught the message of God, it was always there but we needed to be REMINDED. As i said early being pacifist is excellent, i recommend it to everyone, however for those who choose to go against it there must those who appose this behaviour. That is what Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj taught us, stand up for rightousness and the truth, for that is the only way to get closer to God. It is in Sikhi where God has spoken, "Take one step towards me my child, and i shall take a million towards you".

Obviously the gurus made up all this satyug and kalyug stuff. The truth is that homosapiens have been on the planet for no more than 250,000 years.For 100,000 years homosapiens were born dying in the process or killing its mother in the process. Life expectency of not more than 20-25 years. Dying of hunger, micro-organism they didn't know that existed, natural disasters like tsunamis, volcanos and earthquakes which would have been terrifying and mysterious. Mortal fights over women, land, property, food etc. Imagine what it would be like. Almost like kalyug. Today is frikkin satyug compared to that.

So God looks at all this happening for 249,000 years and then suddenly decides to intervene and remind us of the message of God. And best way of doing that is by privately revealing his message to ten gurus, where the news would take so long to spread that it still hasn't penetrated very large parts of the world.

What kind of stupid God is that?

During the 1947 partition people were divided and killed strictly based on religion. 20 million people died in the 1947 partition. I am absolutely convinced that religion(including sikhism) is the main source of hatred in the world.

Bani frees us from pain and suffering?

Do you really think the benefits of sikhism outweigh the drawbacks? I would rather have pain and suffering than have millions of people die because of their difference in faith.

Sikhism may be a better than other religions out there but its still a religion, its still a faith.

To make a point, sometimes examples are essential. Sikh Gurus used already prevailing religious mythology to drive their points across. That doesn't mean they believe that mythology is true. Its just a tool. Just as language is a tool, and words change their meanings over time. But still language has to be used to express an idea.

So ur belief in no God is not a faith? U have belief that there is no God don't you?

Atheists are not making a claim; we disbelieve a claim. Disbelief is non-belief in something.

Atheism is a belief if not playing golf is a sport.

Mate according to sikhism god doesnt give a fuck about humanity or humans or any other creature in universe but still heshe cares AND HESHE IS THE ONE WHO CREATES THEM....we and evry creature are born from him and when we die we are assimilated in him.....God has no purpose for creating this universe nd he need no purpose to destroy it.....he needs no prayers no money, nothing...its all hisher PLAY....just like a child building a sand castle.....a child builds a sand castle and then destroys it with no does the still wtever god has given u ...u must be gratefull to himher bcause u brought nothing in this world when u were born nd u take nothing when u die plus u have no control wtever is happening ....nd for scientist guys..i have only one question...wHO gave them brain to question GOD.........its GOD.....coz without god nothing s possible nt even ATHEISM.....WJKKWJKF

Sikhs do not believe in faith..we believe in the experience.

Athiest do not forget people like Stalin and Pol Pot were athiest. Stalin killed over 20 million people on the line of nationalism and communism. Pol Pot did the same. Roman didnt conquer other lands just for religion. It counquered them for power. This is the same to the British empire.

What was the bases that WW1 began. That war wasnt one of religion but one of sides. People loyal to Austria and those loyal to the allies. This was killed more then 20 million yet you dont mention this. The best example for this is Turkey a muslim country fought along side Germany a christian country. Was religion an issue, no. It was the alliences of the time. Maybe take a deep breath and do a little bit more reading before you fly off the handle as you have done.

Jeevan, I know you won't find any humor in it, but the following line at made me think this was a prank at first: "Sikhism preaches a message of devotion and remembrance of God at all times, truthful living, equality of mankind and denounces superstitions and blind rituals."

THAT'S funny!

I fail to see the humor in you post Jayon. I by no means am religious in any sense, however if you read the message posted from 'mkaur' Sikhsim views God as 'truth'. Truth is the what atheisim is about, to shed the weight of superstition & false belief, and focus on what is 'real'. Sikhism does the same thing at it core, the Adi Granth (call it the Sikh 'holy' book, although I don't like to call it that!) starts out with the following phrase, "There is one god, truth is it's name" Being truthful, kind, caring, etc during your existance is the way to achieve a meaningful existance.

Pantheists say there is one god, Universe is it's name. How is that different or any more incorrect? Substituting "god" for any reality is unnecessarily confusing to the issue of reality/truth.

And why confuse the issue of "truth" by calling it "god"--which is, to many literalists, an existent entity/being. Even to others who view god as metaphorical, such as the Pantheists--god is not "truth" to them necessarily. If a group is truly interested in "truth"--wouldn't "keep it simple" be Rule #1?

"Truth" is not any more or less the name of "god" anymore than "Jehovah" or "Universe" is the name of god; truth is simply whatever is not false. On the other hand, "God" is a completely subjective, self-defined term--basically, whatever anyone wants to make it. Can people call god "truth"? No law against it. Is it necessary? Not at all. Is it confusing to many people? Without a doubt. Is creating undue confusion in people's minds conducive to uncovering truth? Never that I can justify.

I'm highly skeptical that any group who claims to be focused on "truth" would actually go out of their way to create unnecessary confusion by bringing an amorphous and meaningless term as "god" into the equation. What's wrong with Achem's Razor? Why can't we call "truth," "truth"? Isn't that _more_ true than calling it _god_--since many people have different views of what constitutes god--views that are just as metaphorically valid?

You need to read Sri Guru Granth Sahib then you will know what it means by God's name is the truth. i.e. satnam

whatever your faith, lets look at this "truth" business clearly.

now logically, if everyone believed in the "truth", then there wouldnt be a problem. now if some did and some didnt, then there would be a problem. if in the extreme case nobody believed in the "truth"... then what could save us all... hmmm i wonder... the "truth" maybe? that is completely logical, and i didnt bring up the word God to confuse anyone.

did you understand that tracie? because whether you did or didnt, or believed it or not... the "truth" will always be there. thats pretty much the lines Sikhism is walking along. so you see it is better for us all to embrace the truth, as it WILL set us free.

(the last passage is not in any shape or form intended to convert anyone to sikhism, follow your faith, be true to yourself.)

>did you understand that tracie? because whether you did or didnt, or believed it or not... the "truth" will always be there.

I'm just asking why it's not more clear to call truth "truth"? I don't understand the need to confuse it with a word, "god," that has so many different meanings to so many different people. As you seem to agree that "truth" is pretty straightforward, I'm just asking, "Why not keep it straightforward by calling truth 'truth,' rather than 'god' or anything other than 'truth'?"

I'm not sure it's genuine to claim you're not trying to confuse the issue when you go around using ambiguous loaded words in place of straightforward clear words. Not to say "truth" doesn't have it's own issues--but adding all the issues that come with "god" on top of that doesn't seem like a recipe for finding "truth." I've always thought that cutting through the confusion in order to keep an issue as straightforward as possible was a good way to make sure we're not muddying things up. I still don't see how adding unnecessary complications helps the process of discovery.

call it what you want its still the truth. if you see it fit to call it the truth, call it the truth. others may find truth in God. words are meaningless unless theres feeling behind them. the mind is a powerful tool to conquer, you could go your whole life not understanding the truth, and i presume you still dont understand the truth.

in sikhism we're told to believe in Waheguru, which in essence is the truth. there are many ways to get to Waheguru, be it through any faith... but you must understand there is only ONE Waheguru, but many paths leading you there. so all these complications will eventually lead to the truth. its not clear why people complicate the matter or muddy things up, i agree, but think of it this way; the more you complain about God or corruption in the world or anything in general... each breathe you took to stress your own opinion is a breathe lost, you could have used that breathe to say Waheguru. we're all given a mind, and Sikhism gives us the code of conduct, it is up to use to go about it the right way.

waheguru ji ka khalsa, waheuguru ji ke fateh.

If any faith can get you to God then why would anyone follow Sikhism? Think about it.... if I didn't have to be a Sikh to get to a better place after this life then why would I have to go through the ridiculousness association with growing a beard, having a kirpan, or any of the other very specific guidelines for outside wear. Seems a bit silly to be extending extra effort in appeasing something if he would take you in regardless, don't you think?

Also how exactly do you know that there is a God since you are the ones coming on here trying to convert us (and don't say you aren't otherwise you wouldn't be quoting an article that even Sikhs agree is crock.)

Finally, this line here almost made me vomit.

"the more you complain about God or corruption in the world or anything in general... each breathe you took to stress your own opinion is a breathe lost, you could have used that breathe to say Waheguru."

Translation: Don't question a thing! Who cares if the world is screwed up and is going down the toilet, just pray to Waheguru, go the Gurdwarda, and everything will be fine. Don't waste your energy on actually forming an opinion through cognitive thought and then say that opinion.... nope just say "Waheguru" a hundred times like a zombie.

Seems a bit Orwellian when you think about it. ;)

But hey... I'm just Some Dude.

Sorry about the late response "Some Dude", my sincere apologies.

Seems as though my words offended you, made you want to "vomit"... that wasnt my intentions. Now, i didnt say any religion can get you to God, i said faith - theres a difference. And if you really are questioning Sikhism, and the rehat(way of life) our Gurus have given us, then so be it you wouldnt be the first and you wont be the last.

Also you earlier reference to being a zombie... hmm abit rude, Sikhism doesnt knock your way of life, so why knock ours? Saying Waheguru will save you(believe it or not). What are these "opinions" that you speak of, no one will care when you are alive, no one will care when you are long gone and forgotten. We all forget how minute we are in this Universe.

If you follow any religion, you do good deeds. Its great.

Sikhism preaches comtemplation on text, not blind belief. Saying waheguru 100 times won't get anybody there if their heart is corrupt. These are all quotes from guru granth sahib, and this is exactly how a rational person would think. Sikhism doesn't preach that its necessary to be Sikh ( turban, beard, kirpan) to find God. Many saints whose text is in guru granth sahib were not sikh, some of them didn't have beard (per whatever pictures are drawn)

Sikhism is just a school which teaches "How to see Oneness in all". Its a school with uniform (turban, beard etc) and strict discipline (saying waheguru every moment, reading scriptures in the morning and evening).

As we know about any educational system, dropouts can be successful, but a school increases the chances of success.

if a women loves a man, or vice versa, she calls out for the man with devotion and love and by his name, wouldn't the man respond with devotion and love as well. it is a similar concept with god , it is not about how many time you say the lords(god)'s name, it is how you say it..with love and devotion.

A little insight on life as Guru Nanak Devi Ji saw it, please feel free to comment all:

In the first watch of the night, O my merchant friend, you were cast into the womb, by the Lord's Command. Upside-down, within the womb, you performed penance, O my merchant friend, and you prayed to your Lord and Master. You uttered prayers to your Lord and Master, while upside-down, and you meditated on Him with deep love and affection. You came into this Dark Age of Kali Yuga naked, and you shall depart again naked. As God's Pen has written on your forehead, so it shall be with your soul. Says Nanak, in the first watch of the night, by the Hukam of the Lord's Command, you enter into the womb. ||1||

In the second watch of the night, O my merchant friend, you have forgotten to meditate. From hand to hand, you are passed around, O my merchant friend, like Krishna in the house of Yashoda. From hand to hand, you are passed around, and your mother says, ""This is my son."" O, my thoughtless and foolish mind, think: In the end, nothing shall be yours. You do not know the One who created the creation. Gather spiritual wisdom within your mind. Says Nanak, in the second watch of the night, you have forgotten to meditate. ||2||

In the third watch of the night, O my merchant friend, your consciousness is focused on wealth and youth. You have not remembered the Name of the Lord, O my merchant friend, although it would release you from bondage. You do not remember the Name of the Lord, and you become confused by Maya. Revelling in your riches and intoxicated with youth, you waste your life uselessly. You have not traded in righteousness and Dharma; you have not made good deeds your friends. Says Nanak, in the third watch of the night, your mind is attached to wealth and youth. ||3||

In the fourth watch of the night, O my merchant friend, the Grim Reaper comes to the field. So think of the Lord! No one knows this secret, of when the Messenger of Death will seize you and take you away. All your weeping and wailing then is false. In an instant, you become a stranger. You obtain exactly what you have longed for. Says Nanak, in the fourth watch of the night, O mortal, the Grim Reaper has harvested your field. ||4||1||

That is some amazing poetry. Nothing more.

It is obviously not easy to understand and explain truth. In fact the Gurus have said and I agree, that no one knows what God (Truth) is. The Gurus used poetry to convey their message. To me the message is very clear and logical. There was a time when I followed the faith blindly but I now demand logical reasoning before I accept things. Going through the translation of the Sikh scriptures, I found that the explaination is really very simple. Guru Nanak reminds us that from the time we were in the womb, we have been given everything that we need to survive. We continue to receive in our daily life but we seem to forget to thank the one responsible. Guru Nanak reminds us that the world is so complex and large, that therefore, the one responsible must be incredibly powerful. The Gurus have reminded us that the world is so increadibly diverse that we could have been born as any one of the huge number of species. But instead we were born as human with a mind to think and rationalise. An increadibly minute chance of happening but yes we have it. Should we then not remember and give thanks to the one responsible? If I had to choose between two arguments: one that the material world came about by itself and another that the material world was created somehow by an obviously very powerful one we call God or any other name for that matter, then I would chose the latter as it makes much more sense to me. The material world which includes me, cannot logically claim responsibility for causing this awesome creation. I think most religions probably started of with this basic idea but the followers and that seems to include Sikhs as well somehow end up ignoring the simple basic message and instead latch on to ideas of divinity, empty rituals and illogical reasoning. The very same things that Guru Nanak was against. When he was a young boy he refused to wear the "sacred" Hindu thread because when he asked the reason for wearing it, he did not get a satisfactory answer. It is obvious to any observant person that most if not all religions are the cause of many hardships and violence in the world today. I think that no matter which religion one comes from, one must give it a chance by going to the core believes. If the core believes do not stand the test of reason, then try something else. One needs courage to do so. The type of courage that Guru Nanak displayed as a young boy.

Your statement is quite logical and sensible.... But there is a point in calling truth as god... This point is my personal view.. At the guru Nanak Dev ji was trying to enlighten people who were basically Muslims and Hindus , these people believe in God both religions were very different from each nothing was common between the people except the word God when talking of religion.. So he used the word God and explained these people that you believe in God but in this real word if any thing that deserves to be called God it is the truth and humanism... So basically the reason is completely other way round... Truth is called God just make the people believe that a physical God does not exist but truth and humanity is the real God.... The very first lines of Granth sahib explains this by saying "there is only 1 God and his name is truth truth which doesn't fears anyone and does not scares anyone away who is an enemy to none it is timeless it is not living it neither took birth nor it will die of anything was God it was truth if any is God it is the truth and if anything will be God it will be truth only... Guru Nanak collected the unguided people and taught them truth and named them sikh which is roughly translated to the word 'learn'

Why don't you just call it truth? You need a God to start up a religion and herd people into one group. Then they turn against anyone who doesn't believe their "truth". See…. That's what's wrong!

Sikhs do not use the word "God", that word is not in any Indian language. It is used - incorrectly - in translation.

Hi Tracie , i born and raised in Sikh religion . I had practice Sikh religion to find god but couldn't find it . Here Sikh religion's view toward athiests " a head who doesn't bow in front of god, that head should be burn in fire " and " person who don't worship to god he/ she is a dog". So this religion is a same shit like any other . They believe in god . I found this religion is a mixture of Hindu and Muslim religion nothing else .

thats right.... but u must remember , it sounds pretty easy, but its not. its liking walking on the edge of a blade , you fall on this side, u end up as a fundamentalist . u fall to the other side , u will end up as a looser.. there is an endless line of people criticizing religion, but they themselves follow some of their own beliefs..

There is no point arguing about opinion versus knowledge. Knowledge is acquired through a study of the evidence. Investigating the origin of all religion means knowing more than someone who has been indoctrinated into one religion that they probably haven't investigated does. Religion was inspired by ignorance and is useless. All holy books are based on a supernatural explanation for the existence of life and the universe. Religion discourages poking around and finding the facts or using critical thinking because you would realize that there is no scientific proof of any supernatural intervention. Nothing was created or designed and there is no evidence of any of the thousands of gods/goddesses that have been worshiped throughout the ages. The supernatural does not exist. Those who analyze it will realize that you are talking to yourself about nothing. Religion is based on superstition, and discourages logical investigation.

Ancient people believed in the supernatural, which they thought explained many events that because of science we know occur without anything supernatural. They believed that lightening was god chunking thunderbolts from heaven to kill people.Over time religion became a way to control the masses, and from there it evolved into a way to wage war and conquer other cultures.

Religion is very detrimental to society in many ways. One of them is the fact that it gives ineffective politicians something to hide behind. Many politicians want to discuss religion (a non-issue) in order to avoid the real issues. It is not hard to figure out why the countries that are the poorest, and retain the most unethical societies, are the most religious.

Supernatural is just assumed it has never been proven by any fact. It is there because someone believes it exists. Faith is all that is required for asserting belief in a god that transcends the natural world. The supernatural god is a belief without proof. Those who believe claim to have experienced the supernatural. Someone's supernatural experiences are not proof to anyone else.

There are many people who do not use critical thinking or (common sense) to determine what is an actual perception of reality and what is not real. Nobody could ever produce one shred of evidence for a supernatural god, that is why it will remain something that is spiritual and resides in a supernatural realm that we can not perceive in the real world.

People should examine the basis for superstition and belief in a supernatural god. If they do they will probably come to the realization that a supernatural god living in a supernatural realm is not there. Religion is an irrational belief that some dishonest people have used to promote the idea that they have the extraordinary ability to perceive a nonexistent god. There are lots of people in the world who resort to acts of violence defending their imaginary friend whose existence is beyond the visible observable universe. People are being brainwashed to care more about an imaginary world than the real world. That is because of certain greedy interests that do not want real change. Religion is a tool used by the powerful against the weak. If people are so desperate for a purpose in life why don't they go to work trying to improve the conditions in the here and now real world that we all live in.

Thoughts that cross my mind. Would like to get some answers.

1. Why is "Waheguru" ,"Satnam" etc. translated as God?

2. Did the 10 gurus who composed "Sri Guru Granth Sahib" have different views?

3. Is the fact that most Sikhs have inherited Sikhism make a difference about how the religion is perceived by the believers and non believers?

4. Can Sikhism be an earlier form of Atheism?

5. Is Sikhism Distorted throughout centuries?

6. Guru Nanak Dev Ji dressed as half Muslim half Hindu, people would ask him "what are you?", he would ask "What are you?", they would reply Hindu or Muslim and he said "There are no Muslims or Hindus, there are just human beings". How come today when someone asks a Sikh what are you he/she replies"A Sikh." ?( I Mean weren't we taught not to label ourselves?")

7. Was Sikhism not suppose to be a religion?

8. Jap Ji Saheb was written by Guru Nanak Dev Ji when he was enlightened. "". If the word "God" isn't used as a translation, in Guru Nanak Dev Ji's time wasn't it probably the most atheist thing?

9. The Sikh Gurus said that the Hindu beliefs were wrong but still died for the Hindu faith. Were they just protecting freedom of speech, freedom of religion etc. Thus were they not being religious at all?

10. Sikhism is all about education. During the time of the Gurus there were not as many resources as we have today. Shouldn't we learn from these resources?

I think if Sikhism was not perceived as a religion and as a process in which we educated ourselves, criticized and learned it would be more effetive.

Sikh = Scholar (period :))

Here are my attempts to answer your questions friend:

1. Satnam means His Name Is True. Waheguru is translated as God in Gurmukhi when Guru Nanak Dev Ji came back with the message of God.

2. The Ten Gurus DID NOT have seperate views. It took Ten Living Gurus to give us the complete package, the message of God. Each did focus on certain parts such as; Simran, Self Righteousness, Sewa etc but the same light of God was in all, therefore each Guru believed in the same thing. As times changes, so did the Guru. Many believe that a Sikh Guru is just a regular man, very very wrong. They hold the word of God and taught us the way to God.

3. No, Sikhi is true and always will be, its not inherited. Some do call themselves Sikhs just because their parents call themselves Sikhs, that does not make a Sikh.

4. Sikhi cannot be defined as a form of Atheism. All bani starts with the praise of God. There is one simple shabad in bani that translates to; Man without God, is a fish without water. The whole purpose of Sikhi is to get one with God, not ignore Gods existence.

5. Absolutely not. Shri Guru Granth Sahib has been true for almost 3centuries now and will continue to be true. Thats the amazing thing about Sikhi, it will always remain pure and true. Whether weak minds tend to live life in their own ways, and dillute the teachings is their own decision, it doesnt affect Sikhi in any way.

6. Firstly, you cannot dress as a half Hindu/ half Muslim!! Thats just ridiculous. The reference you refer to has been misunderstood. When asked what CASTE are you, Guru Nanak Dev Ji refused to answer. Those are the labels Guru Nanak Dev Ji slammed, not religious. Also by calling yourself a Sikh, you arent bragging that im better than anyone else. Where as in the olden days to all yourself a higher caste was building you ego, and bad for the lower castes. A Sikh means a learner. A Sikh has a Guru and a Rehat. A Sikh is not part of anything, we are here today gone tomorow, dust under Gods feet if you will. Therefore we do not label ourselves we just live life in accordance to Gurus teaching. Some may choose to label themselves, but they are not true Sikhs.

7. Define religion; the belief in and worship of a god or gods, or any such system of belief and worship. According to this definition, Sikhi could be called a religion. Although it does stress that there is Only One God. Logically Sikhi isnt really an "ism".. thats just a word adopted by Western Culture. Sikhi is a way of life and something we practise in everyday life.

8. Didn't really understand this question. The link that you posted was Mool Mantar, the translations might be abit off. Ek Onkar Satnam = There is only ONE GOD and his NAME IS TRUTH. The entire Mool Mantar was written for the praise of God and God alone, tell me whats Atheist about that?

9. You misunderstand so much. Sikhi not once said Hindus were wrong in anyway. Any faith is good so long as you believe in it and God 100% full hearted. The whole purpose of any Faith should be to be at One With God. Guru Nanak Dev Ji said, be a Hindu just be a good Hindu, be a Muslim just be a good Muslim. Never slated any faith, maybe just the religious practises such as throwing water to the "gods" in the sun. Also, Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji never died for the Hindu Faith.... rememeber that. Guru Ji stood up for good and righteousness, be it a Hindu, Muslim, Christian in need. Sikhi has always preached stand up for good and protect those who need protecting. Its this dark age of Kaliyug, that Sikhi explains quite clearly whats to happen and what actions a Gursikh needs to take.

10. Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj said all your answers will be in Guru Granth Sahib. Instead of running around wasting precious time for answers that you probably won't find, we have our Guru that was compiled by 6 Gurus and 21 Hold people. The Gurus have done the hard work for us, and we should appriciate it in everyday life. Guru Granth Sahib Ji is universal and for everybody.

NANAK NAAM CHARDI KALA TERE PANE SARBAT KA PULA. Sikhi asked God to take care of others aswell as ourselves. Hope my answers helped.

"Didn't really understand this question. The link that you posted was Mool Mantar, the translations might be abit off. Ek Onkar Satnam = There is only ONE GOD and his NAME IS TRUTH. The entire Mool Mantar was written for the praise of God and God alone, tell me whats Atheist about that?" ek onkar = one universal creator this was a way to unify people, different gods create divisions. saying there is just one god would create unity. think about is there is only one force that governs the universe and anything beyond, IT DOES NOT have to be god. God is SIkhism is different than other Gods. you see God = nature in sikhism! Who Does NOT believe in nature? and why am i even asking that question?

notice how it says the NAME is the truth NOT god himself.

The name is truth and god himself is BS. lol

1. Waheguru means wonderful teacher satnam is not translated as god, it means True is God's name. Sat- true, nam - name

2. the 10 gurus had basically the same views.

3. don't know

4. In fact, yes! You can definitely look at Sikhism like that. God is Sikhism is WAAAAAY different. To other religions Sikhs are atheists.

5. Sikhism distorted? hmm, well the Sri Guru Granth Sahib hasn't been distorted, and that's the source of Nanakian philosophy. And no I didn't answer you question.

6.How come today when someone asks a Sikh what are you he/she replies"A Sikh." HAHA that's because you are asking a Sikh. well, Nanak could have said I am neither meaning he's a human first. because to some people religion comes first.

7. Sikhism is not a religion if you take out the rehit maryada.

8. "One Universal Creator God. The Name Is Truth. Creative Being Personified. No Fear. No Hatred. Image Of The Undying, Beyond Birth, Self-Existent. By Guru's Grace ~" man ur right. isn't nanakian philosophy amazing?

9. Absolutely, they were protecting the rights of others. what does religious mean anyway?? in sikhism, you gotta protect the rights of others.

10. definitely! why is this even a question?

to ur last comment, yes! it would be more effective if it wasn't taught as a religion but hey, religion can mean different things. But i get what you are saying.

Sikh= student, seeker, learner, disciple , etc actually ;)

Thoughts that cross my mind. Would like to get some answers.

1. Why is "Waheguru" ,"Satnam" etc. translated as God? -Satnam means His Name Is True. Waheguru is translated as God in Gurmukhi when Guru Nanak Dev Ji came back with the message of God. (But Sikhi believes that there is no one name for God)

2. Did the 10 gurus who composed "Sri Guru Granth Sahib" have different views? -Nope, they had the same views, the later Gurus just added to what the previous Guru taught.

3. Is the fact that most Sikhs have inherited Sikhism make a difference about how the religion is perceived by the believers and non believers? -Depends on the Non-Believes, if you're someone like Richard Dawkins (AMAZING MAN, if you dont know who he is, you better read up) than you would look down at a Sikh who inherited, but for some reason, people think that converts are more religious and pure (a lot of converts take their religion seriously)

4. Can Sikhism be an earlier form of Atheism? -Personally the only difference I see between then is God, Sikhism and Atheism are the only logical beliefs I can think of.

5. Is Sikhism Distorted throughout centuries? -No, Sikhism is the only religion where the Holy Scripts were written by the actual teachers.

6. Guru Nanak Dev Ji dressed as half Muslim half Hindu, people would ask him "what are you?", he would ask "What are you?", they would reply Hindu or Muslim and he said "There are no Muslims or Hindus, there are just human beings". How come today when someone asks a Sikh what are you he/she replies"A Sikh." ?( I Mean weren't we taught not to label ourselves?") -This is a good question. I think it is because Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji made it an official religion. But I see where you're coming from.

7. Was Sikhism not suppose to be a religion? -Yea, I guess so, but in the end, Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji was just living his life and others thought it was a logical, fulfilling life... he did not push anything on others.

8. Jap Ji Saheb was written by Guru Nanak Dev Ji when he was enlightened. "". If the word "God" isn't used as a translation, in Guru Nanak Dev Ji's time wasn't it probably the most atheist thing? -Most Atheist thing would be to say there is no God. :P But I don't get this question. :S

9. The Sikh Gurus said that the Hindu beliefs were wrong but still died for the Hindu faith. Were they just protecting freedom of speech, freedom of religion etc. Thus were they not being religious at all? -Sikhism believe that no matter what your religion is, you should still have the right to be free. The Hindus [as well as Sikhs] were bring oppressed by the Moghul Empire who were pushing their form of Islam onto others. When Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji was told about this, he made a deal, convert him and the Sikhs and Hindus will follow (a lot of Hindus saw the Gurus as very spiritual people and respected thier judgement) In the end, Sri Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji did not convert. After that, his son Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji told the Sikhs to rise up and defend their and others rights because we're all in this together. This is why many religious Sikhs learn "Shastar Vidya" (the Art of Weaponry) or "Gatka".

10. Sikhism is all about education. During the time of the Gurus there were not as many resources as we have today. Shouldn't we learn from these resources? What is there to learn now that the Gurus did not know? Science has PROVED (yes proves its fact and real) evolution and the Big Bang is highly accepted. And Sikhism believes in evolution and the Big Bang.

I think if Sikhism was not perceived as a religion and as a process in which we educated ourselves, criticized and learned it would be more effective.

Sikh = Scholar (period :)) Actually you are right there Sikh literally means Scholar.

And guess what... GOD DOESN'T CARE IF YOU'RE ATHEIST (lol like many Atheists would care) but in Sikhi God will not judge you on your religion, your actions will determine your end.

Hey, I actually asked the same question to my mom once, about why us as Sikh have to haev long hair and tie turban and have all the 5 K's when our Gurus said that all religions are equal and we should be humans first. So why do we need to follow everything Sikhi told us to do such as keep our hair.

Her Reply to me was: First of all Sikhism was started by Guru Nanak Dev Ji as a new way of thinking, of questioning things that were prevalent at that time all over the world (I am guessing similar to Atheism). he did not make it a religion. However, during that time, a lot of bad things were happening such as Hindus being converted to Islam forcefully or Kings/wealthy people taking advantage of common man, girls being raped or burnt alive and a lot of other things that were just against humanity. No one was trying to stop all of this due to fear, they were not raising their voice. At that time, Guru Gobind Singh Ji and his predecessors decided to raise a voice against all of that. They protected people who needed protection from the ones who were doing wrongful deeds. That's how Saint Soldiers came to being; they were the protectors of the weak and voice against injustice. And Guru Gobind Singh Ji gave name to this movement by establishing Khalsa and made it kinda of a religion. He is the one who told us to keep our hair and tie a turban. The reason behind this was because He believed that when a Sikh ties a turban, anyone can recognize him/her as a Sikh. Its like having a symbol that shows you are a Sikh in 100s and 1000s of people. And when you have that symbol on you and others can recognize you with that, they would expect you to protect them and raise against injustice. You are bound to perform your duty of being a Saint Soldier and protect the innocent. You can't hide behind anything or can't say oh wait I am not Sikh so I don't have to protect anyone. You are bound to perform your duty. You can't hide behind any mask. You are bound to protect humanity, no matter what (even if that means giving your life for humanity). A sikh can't just stand there and see injustice/inhumanity taking place. He/She has to do something about it, even if it means dialing 911; a sikh must do something to protect others when injustice is happening. That is the reason why Sikhs are supposed to have a turban and 5 K's. Its a dress code that bounds you with the duty of protection of humanity in this world, so that no Sikh can disregard their responsibility. A common person is not bound by this responsibility but a Sikh is. Ofcourse, if someone doesn't want to perform this duty, they do not have to adhere to the dress code.

After listening to her view, I actually understood the reason behind all this.

And one more thing (please don't take this offensively - I am certainly not trying to convert someone or telling Atheists to believe in God) If anyone does get a chance to go to India, please visit Harminder Sahib (Golden Temple) once. For non Sikhs, you don't have to think of it as a religious journey, think of it as visiting some historic place (but please be respectful to their rules and regulations) , but do visit it once if you get a chance. And if you do go, just sit there for 5-10 mins and you will feel this peace inside you, its like no other feeling in the world. You will feel so light, its like all the worries of the world have been lifted from your shoulders and you are just happy.

Well put, I just hope this young religion does not get tainted by false holy men; there are already cracks with off shoots of Sikism with sheep following them blindly. In about 2000 years from now, will we too have sects of the faith.

1. Sikhism teaches us to respect all religions. Why should religions have a special regard of respect where they are immune to any criticism. They are just belief systems that are full of BS.

2. Even if there were a God why would we have to pray to him or even believe in him? Chant and meditate( Jap ), why?

3. How about all the strange and miraculous events about Nanak such as a poisonous cobra being seen to shield the sleeping child's head from the harsh sunlight, him squeezing milk and blood from rotis, crops magically appearing after they were grazed by his cattle, and his dead body turning into flowers, half of which were buried by the muslims and half were burned by the hindus. At Nanak's birth an astrologer, who came to write his horoscope ,insisted on seeing the child. On seeing the infant, he is said to have worshipped him with clasped hands. The astrologer then remarked that he regretted that he should never live to see young Guru Nanak as an adult.

An astrologer? Astrology:a pseudoscience claiming divination by the positions of the planets and sun and moon. We already know astrology is BS.

In Shri Guru Granth Sahib the Guru-aspect of Guru Nanak Dev Ji descending upon Guru Angad Dev Ji is described as having even a physical manifestation whereby Angad in person suddenly appeared to look like Nanak.


4. Sikhs believe in Yamraj (Messenger of death)and ghost.

The Gurus were very intelligent people at their time and they did alot of good things, but that does not mean they were right about EVERYTHING they said.

1. Sikhism believes in freedom of religion (not respecting the way they are). Gurus have sternly criticized many hindu and muslim practices of their times. ( water to sun for your dead relatives)

2. Don't have to. Till one realizes that life is full of sorrow and agony and something is to be done about it. If one is happy with status quo, no prayers are necessary.

3. These stories are not core beliefs of sikhism. The essence doesn't change if these stories are rejected. About second point "In Shri Guru Granth Sahib the Guru-aspect of Guru Nanak Dev Ji descending upon Guru Angad Dev Ji is described as having even a physical manifestation whereby Angad in person suddenly appeared to look like Nanak" could you please give a reference

4. Gurus used prevailing mythology as an example to drive across the point. The poetry uses example. The rational people don't take the example as truth. The rational people look at the point stated by example. When they say "chitra-gupta are noting your deeds and you will be closer to God or further away depending on those" - It just means that "You deeds will take you farther or closer to God (Truth)" If nanak were preaching in europe, he would use christian examples. Its as simple as that.

Obviously the gurus made up all this satyug and kalyug stuff. The truth is that homosapiens have been on the planet for no more than 250,000 years.For 100,000 years homosapiens were born dying in the process or killing its mother in the process. Life expectency of not more than 20-25 years. Dying of hunger, micro-organism they didn't know that existed, natural disasters like tsunamis, volcanos and earthquakes which would have been terrifying and mysterious. Mortal fights over women, land, property, food etc. Imagine what it would be like. Almost like kalyug. Today is frikkin satyug compared to that.

So God looks at all this happening for 249,000 years and then suddenly decides to intervene and remind us of the message of God. And best way of doing that is by privately revealing his message to ten gurus, where the news would take so long to spread that it still hasn't penetrated very large parts of the world.

What kind of stupid God is that?

During the 1947 partition people were divided and killed strictly based on religion. 20 million people died in the 1947 partition. I am absolutely convinced that religion(including sikhism) is the main source of hatred in the world.

Bani frees us from pain and suffering?

Do you really think the benefits of sikhism outweigh the drawbacks? I would rather have pain and suffering than have millions of people die because of their difference in faith.

Sikhism may be a better than other religions out there but its still a religion, its still a faith.

I'm a Sikh and I can honestly say that if I was someone without a religion ready to pick one, it would still be Sikhism. In my opinion it's the most straight forward religion out there. There's no rituals, superstitions etc

Growing your hair, carrying the kirpan and the other of the 5k's were brought in place 200 years after the birth of the religion and they are all symbolic.

As for saying things like astrology is BS, there are many things I now believe in that I would have called BS a few years ago. Things have happened to me and I have experienced things first hand from which I can clearly conclude to you:

There is more to the world that what only science can (yet) prove.

I bet if you told somebody 2000 years ago that a machine would exist which can get around the world in less than a day, they would have said BS! Same with the idea of a mobile telephone, I bet suggesting that you could contact someone anywhere in the world within a few seconds would have been dismissed as mysticism and again BS!

Check out Tajinder (Jim) Virdee, he came up with the idea of the 'Theory of Everything,' the experiment phase of which is currently taking place in Switzerland at CERN. He is a Sikh who believes that there's more Science out there. Scientists are trying to recreate the big bang at a small scale to find the missing foundation element that Einstein couldn't find in his lifetime. Sikhism is the only religion which agrees with the big bang theory.

Just because you haven't got concrete scientific evidence as yet, it doesn't mean something is BS, it probably just hasn't been researched yet.

Ready to pick a religion? Why?

Astrology was invented by humans. Studies have shown that astrology is false. I don't understand why you would still believe in it and carry some false hope for it to be a science in the future.

i am sure you are telling the truth about your experiences, but the human mind is extremely susceptible to halucenation. Reaching conclusions based on personal experiences is stupid.

Yes, there is more to the world that science can yet prove. But this is not a good excuse to believe in something supernatural based on personal experience. A human being is not even capable of perceiving reality as it is, just a simulation of reality.

Tejinder Virdee did not come up with the theory of everything. The idea for a theory of everything has been around since ancient greeks and has still not been discovered. Even if he did come up with it, it is irrelevant.

So what if it agrees with the big bang theory? I am sure Nanak didn't propose the theory in the Adi Granth.

"Just because you haven't got concrete scientific evidence about the existence of fairies as yet, it doesn't mean something is BS, it probably just hasn't been researched yet."

See what you are saying? Some things can just not be proven or disproven.

1. Fuck God!

2. Fuck Guru Nanak Dev!

I know you found the second one more offensive. Think to yourself. Why?

Wow, umm wow, you're right :| Thanks, I am a Sikh, but this needs to be spread :O

Like "Fuck God Fuck - (specific profit)" and a theist will be more offended by the second one... wow :|

I'll answer questions to the best of my knowledge. #1 is answered already.

2. Did the 10 gurus who composed "Sri Guru Granth Sahib" have different views? I'm a Sikh and to be honest I'm not sure, but I feel the earlier is right. But feelings don't matter right?

This is raises an interesting issues about who knows about their religion and who does. I don't know about my religion, and there is of course a lot to learn. I'd rather learn it for myself while comparing it other ideas of God and so on (e.g. the first uncaused cause idea). The problem here is that everyone here, and all too often in the real-world, pretend to be "experts" when in fact they aren't. Unless you have read all or most of the material, studied the literature, or hold some sort of degree I'd say you have the necessary credentials to talk about religion. It doesn't mean everything you say is true, but its just more relevant; to me at least. Same goes for atheist. Most I find are atheist either because they are born in to their faith, or reject their faith [most of the time Christianity]. They either reject their religion due to some short-coming (e.g. a contradiction), or philisophical reason (e.g. there is no God). A true atheist should be one, in my opinion at least, who studied or looked at most religions. I talked to my professor who's an atheist and he failed to talk about Buddhism; a religion that does NOT believe in God, or a soul, but rather karmic energy.

3. Is the fact that most Sikhs have inherited Sikhism make a difference about how the religion is perceived by the believers and non believers?

Absolutely. Most people of all faiths or ideas, like atheism, are born in to it!

4. Can Sikhism be an earlier form of Atheism?

Definately not. Since from the get-go Guru Nanak talked about Waheguru. Although if Sikhism was a Venn diagram

5. Is Sikhism Distorted throughout centuries?

I'll say no. Why? Because of the fact that Sikhism started ~500 years ago most of the evidence exists. The holy book, the Guru Granth Sahib Ji, was made DURING, not after the time of the Gurus. The stories and so on can be proven to be true too. We have a great understanding of old civilizations, but the more recent they are to today, the more we know. At least that's the general trend.

6. Guru Nanak Dev Ji dressed as half Muslim half Hindu, people would ask him "what are you?", he would ask "What are you?", they would reply Hindu or Muslim and he said "There are no Muslims or Hindus, there are just human beings". How come today when someone asks a Sikh what are you he/she replies"A Sikh." ?( I Mean weren't we taught not to label ourselves?")

I'm not sure about the dress code. In all honesty Sikh has dual meaning today. Sikh originally means "student." So when you ask the question "what are you?" and I reply "I'm a Sikh," I'm saying I'm a student [duh]. The second meaning today refers to the organized religion. Its just like Muslims. Muslim means 'one who submits to the will of God' but today it also means the name of the faith (they were called Muhammadians before). So remember that next time you read a Sikh or Islamic quote!

7. Was Sikhism not suppose to be a religion?

I don't have the quote on me, but I can say that by the time of the fifth Guru its clear that Sikhism was distinct from Hinduism and Islam. The fifth Guru said something like we don't follow their ways. Important part is the word "we."

9. The Sikh Gurus said that the Hindu beliefs were wrong but still died for the Hindu faith. Were they just protecting freedom of speech, freedom of religion etc. Thus were they not being religious at all?

In my opinion (and yes its my opinion only) is that being a Sikh is too fold. Your spiritual part and the worldly matters. We rejected the Hindu views, but it doesn't mean they are wrong. It just means that if your going to follow this faith you can't follow the other one (I think?). I recall a quote from Guru Nanak who said something like "the Hindu claims his religion has the truth, and the Muslim claims his religion has the truth but both are liars." This to me means that no one religion has the absolute truth.

In my view Sikhism and all religions are man-made. But are an attempt for mortals to understand the true reality behind us. Its like the movie the matrix. You can live in the matrix, or reach "savlation" and see the true reality (which in the movie is the real world and my metaphor refers to God). If not, then I feel SIkhism has a partial answer which is that we continue to live and die in the matrix - and to me there's nothing wrong with that at all. However, you will be stuck in this cycical form of lifes and death. With your soul, whatever that is, and your karmic energy, whatever that is, that keeps moving along, from wherever to wherever (this universe, this planet, this dimensions, etc.). Any ways, in the movie it was mentioned that some individuals automatically, by themselves, had self-realization and found out the truth for themselves. This is what I believe religion is, humans who have realized the reality of the world. I'm really not sure if we figured it out ourselves, by the assistance of God, by other forces (angels), or even maybe a combination or all of these answers.

I hope this made sense!

depends on the intention of sayer, and the situation.

Both these statements have no meaning at face value.

If it is said in one-to-one situation, I would ignore it. However, if it is said in group situation, I, as a sikh, would be considered week if I don't react to apparent insult to me. I need to react to it.

Another point, in bhakti culture, Guru is considered as reverent as God. There is a shloka by Kabir ( not in Guru Granth Sahib) - Guru Gobind Dou Khade....(If God and Guru both are at my door, whose feet should I touch first; It should be Guru because because he is responsible for making me meet God)

God is a very abstract concept. Sikhs show their reverence to Guru - and eventually in sikhs' mind there is no difference between God and Guru. Also the sikh name for God - Waheguru means the great wondrous Guru

spread the love!!!!!! y argue??? does it really matter if god is there or not??? if a person: - does good deads, - respects others ways of life, - is not a hater, - thinks he is not superior to anyone - treats everyone equally - does not lie - shares his wealth - helps the one in need - does not cheat (mailny on his wife/her husband) - abides the laws of nature - does not do anything that harms other - not crual toward anyone (even the animals) - thiks of other women or men as his/her brother and sister. - (plus some other things i can not think of rite now) - then that person is sucessful in his life. * if that person thiks there is god then he would not be afraid of facing god or w.e when his book of his deeds is read or w.e. * if that person thinks there is no god then that person is just following laws of the society and living a health life.

and this is what is preached in sikhism. the only difference is that in sikhism it is said that there is god.

i know i m unclear about some of my points and i know many of u'll have questions after reading my post. fell free to ask thanks.

satnam waheguru (truth is the name of the master)

fuck you. both those comments r equally offensive

QUOTE: From: singh (Posted Nov 13, 2010 at 4:49 pm) fuck you. both those comments r equally offensive

That reply appears to fit with this comment.

QUOTE: From: Offended by what (Posted Oct 28, 2008 at 5:25 am) 1. Fuck God! 2. Fuck Guru Nanak Dev! I know you found the second one more offensive. Think to yourself. Why?

If that is what you were replying to - it must have taken a long time to get offended.

Frankly, all beliefs are not all that different from each other. The majority of people assume (whatever their religion) that it is unique and of course it is the only right one.

The Pope is supposedly Jesus incarnate - Jesus is God incarnate.

There were references to reincarnation in the Old and New Testament. The belief in reincarnation was common at the time in the surrounding Greek and Far Eastern cultures. Hindus from India and Greek Pythagorean were the likely sources of influence.

The belief in some Eastern religions, is the belief that reincarnation depended on your previous life, the new life would be a higher or lower form, until full purification is attained. That sounds pretty much like what is being proselytized here.

The evil human body is a trap for the spirit that is trying to escape. The world is evil, but they are not responsible for any of that evil. It's those who don't believe what they are preaching who cause the evil, and they will go to war to prove that, as a matter of fact.

Interestingly enough all religions start with the premise that humanity is evil, and I think this has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Actually speaking the truth, I was offended the same

Dude,,, Dont Respect God If U Dont Want,, But U Have No Right TO Abbuse Or To Use Harsh Words....

Sikh said, "There is more to the world that what only science can (yet) prove."

Sikh, Eastern Mysticism and numerous other religious concepts of wisdom over knowledge, oneness with nature and unlimited reality has nothing to do with scientific concepts. Their claims have no credibility and their claims are not scientifically justifiable. Many of them use discoveries of scientists to support ideologies that have various different interpretations (nothing specific). All religions have a basic doctrine that is agreed upon by the believers. Many religions have a belief in the supernatural that may also be presented as a duality of one kind of reality that can unite with a different kind of reality (the supernatural) and become one.

To explain myths or any other mystical preconceived ideology with quantum physics is a multi-faceted problem. For instance the use of the duality of particles is used to prove something mystical. Our lack of knowledge about the definite existence or non-existence of a particle before it has been actualized does not imply that it manifests some kind of strange reality between existence and nonexistence. We know it does in fact exist but we may have to predict where it exists.

Physicists would like to replace Einstein's relativity theory of gravity with something that handles all fundamental forces. The new theories of gravity picture space-time as having a shifting, frothy structure at physical scales trillions of times smaller than an electron. Some models predict that the foamy aspect of space-time will cause higher-energy gamma rays to move slightly more slowly than photons at lower energy. Such a model would violate Einstein's edict that all electromagnetic radiation - radio waves, infrared, visible light, X-rays and gamma rays travels through a vacuum at the same speed.

In May of 2009 NASA Space telescope Fermi and other satellites detected a so-called short gamma ray burst designated GRB 090510. Astronomers think this type of explosion happens when neutron stars collide. Ground-based studies show the event took place in a galaxy 7.3 billion light-years away. Of the many gamma ray photons Fermi's LAT detected from the 2.1-second burst, two possessed energies differing by a million times. Yet after traveling some seven billion years, the pair arrived just nine-tenths of a second apart. This eliminates any new theory of gravity that predicts a strong energy dependent change in the speed of light. The photons traveled at the same speed, so, Einstein's theory was confirmed.

Various religious persuasion and mystics claim that quantum mechanics supports their philosophies and they do try to use new scientific theories to support their specific ideologies that they promote. The most usual way they have gotten their ideologies to conform to new scientific discoveries is through twisting scientific theories (quantum mechanics) in order to prove what they already believe.

There are books by mystics that are not explaining quantum mechanics but only giving non-technical concepts of the new physics. When they try to unite mysticism with the new physics they run into problems. They say that we can not say that an atomic particle exists at a certain place and we can't say it does not exist. The particle has a strange probability pattern to exist and not exist. We can't describe the state of the particle in terms of fixed opposite concepts, because the particle is not present at a definite place but it is not omitted. The particle does not change position or rest. What changes is the probability pattern.

This is not the same as saying something exist with no proof of it's existence. That would be like saying that if we predict how many people will die if there is a certain kind of epidemic is the same as saying that there is an epidemic before it happens. If we did say there was an epidemic before it happened that is not that different from transcending the concepts of existence and non-existence as is done in many kinds of mysticism. It is no longer a probability explanation of a quantum event. Now it is a reality that transcends the concepts, it is now about how a mystic think of reality and that is supposed to have some kind of applicability to quantum mechanics.

They have used this same reasoning in the space-time continuum. They claim to reach an extraordinary state of consciousness, which transcends the three-dimensional to a multidimensional reality. The mystics say time does not exist and therefore is a human illusion. Does this mean that there is a time and space illusion? Albert Einstein's greatest insight was realizing that time is relative. It speeds up or slows down depending on how fast one thing is moving relative to something else. For perception of motion to exist at all, it must be what it is, in its entirety, over a non-zero period of time. Time began with the cosmic origin. There was no time before time. The big bang was the beginning of time itself; any discussion about before the big bang is meaningless.

A branch of scientific inquiry called quantum physics deals with events that occur at the atomic level; we don't experience them in daily life. On the scale of atoms and molecules, the usual commonsense rules of cause and effect are suspended. The rule of law is replaced by a sort of anarchy or chaos, and things happen spontaneously-for no particular reason. Particles of matter may simply pop into existence without warning, and then equally abruptly disappear again. Or a particle in one place may suddenly materialize in another place, or reverse its direction of motion. Again, these are real effects occurring on an atomic scale, and they can be demonstrated experimentally.

What we learned from quantum physics is this: Sometimes things just happen- this need not actually violate the laws of physics. The abrupt and uncaused appearance of something can occur within the scope of scientific law, once quantum laws have been taken into account. Nature apparently has the capacity for genuine spontaneity. The spontaneous appearance of the singularity (universe) from nothing need not break scientific laws or be unnatural or unscientific, and it was not a supernatural event.

Einstein found that space and times are part of the physical universe, and they are linked. In fact, space as one thing and time as another are not suitably valid concepts. Einstein's theory of space and time unified them in a space-time continuum. Space has three dimensions, and time has one, so space-time is a four-dimensional continuum.

The big bang was a sudden, explosive origin of space, time, and matter. Time did not always exist. Time emerged out of space in a continuous process. Continuous meaning time-like quality of a dimension, as opposed to space-like quality, it is not all space or all time; there are shades in between. This can be made as a precise mathematical statement. However, it is another example of duality.

Mystics claim that they can achieve extraordinary states of consciousness in which they transcend the three-dimensional to experience a higher multidimensional reality. If there are any higher dimensions of consciousness they would be occurring in space-time, and how meditation gets mystics to this multidimensional reality is never explained. It is also not clear to me that they even understand time dimensions what so ever.

Some mystics use the subatomic world to say there is no absolute reality because the object could never be completely separated from the observer. Some mystics claims that what the observer knows in actuality is not separate from what they observe. The idea is that through (consciousness) observing something makes it exists but if we don't observe it doesn't exist. The Observer knows a thing by being the thing. There is not one interpretation of quantum mechanics that claims that the object and the observer co-exist. We know that things can exist without us ever observing them and the two things are separate. That is because it is impossible to be what you see, and we also know it is ridiculous as hell. Dependency of the object on the act of observing has nothing to do with the atomic and subatomic worlds.

One of the most common transcendental or mystic ideas is oneness. Everything is really just all one thing; even opposites are united. If they use quantum mechanics in their oneness theory it could present a problem because quantum mechanics can also be the cause of disunity, because it shows how the whole breaks down. The process is called quantum de-coherence, and it is the central issue in the modern discussion of quantum computing.

Sorry Mystics and metaphysical proponents but I do not believe that we create reality. If we did we would not all understand things in the same way, but we do. We do not make reality we observe it as something that is separate from it. All religions seem to want us to believe that we don't know what "real" is - don't believe what you see with your own eyes, believe what I'm telling you. The concept is that you can't reach the level of knowing about these (elusive) things unless these mystics teach you how to meditate yourself into some other dimension. If people waste their time on things like this I don't care, but I wouldn't. What scientific research is discovering is extraordinary and provable. These are the things that are truly amazing and do require study and effort on the part of the scientists that provide indisputable proof before calling something a scientific theory. That's not the same as a conceptual theory that has no evidence except for someone's experience to back it up.

I was wondering about the comment that was made about Russell, Bertrand. I acknowledge that the man was a brilliant philosopher and a great mathematician. But what i do find is that although the man wrote about philosophy and was critical about religions. The statement that he made on sikhism, it in a published journal article. I mean yeah he could have just said that as an aside, but what i am interested in knowing is did he publish anything within that regards? Unless it is published i find that it is hard to believe what a person has said and if it is possible it was taken out of context. I don't want anyone to take this message as offensive message against sikhism or anything, but my questions about his statement is some sort of academic curiosity.

source wikipedia --the founder of Sikhism was Nanak who lived from 1469-1538. So the claims the original poster made as to Sikhism being so enlightened and scientifically accurate fail to impress due to the fact that all of those ideas had been around long before Nanak was born. But just because Sikhism touts reincarnation instead of heaven and hell (making it a less divisive) doesn't make it true.

this was interesting

well mates... religions r n were made by humans.... ev religion is full of myths....irritating beliefs..... evthin is false//// m an atheist born in a sikh family.... man made god......and ppl fear dats y dey worship so called der imaginary friend called god... wise men dont need any1.... except njoying soccer match wid sm beers..... i do accept sm of d religous facts r gud n can bring in a uniform way...dats wat i call a me : kunwar077@yahoo.coom

kunwar sin, If I am deciphering this correctly you are saying that you "do accept that sm (some) of d (the) religious facts r (are) gud (good) n (and) can bring (but) in a uniform way."

Religion is not good, it is not the facts, and it has never brought about peace and that includes Sikh. All the "new religions" claim to be so complex that it is beyond the comprehension of the human brain. That is why people have to be taught by a specially blessed person (it's called brainwashing) and all religions make the claim that they explain things better than science, but there is no interpretation of a creator that fits with what we know from science.

Hinduism was once the main religion of India until the Muslims migrated into India from the West. Muslims established their own empire in India and became the ruling class. The story goes that Nanak was born in Pakistan to a Hindu family but he refused to practice Hindu rituals. Nanak preached that there was one god and that he was only interested in Truth. Nanak's followers were called Sikhs from the Sanskrit word shishya meaning one who is learning. Hindu and Muslims became his followers in large numbers.

A "new religion" that would bring the Muslims and the Hindu together is not a "new" idea since Christianity was going to bring all the religions together; all it has ever done is crush free thought and genius everywhere, and bring about far more conflict and bloodshed.

Hindus and Sikhs are now in India, and Muslims are in Pakistan. Muslims had a justifiable fear of being ruled by the more numerous Hindus. The partition of British colonial India into the free nations of India and Pakistan did not solve the problem; Hindu and Muslim nations are still at odds and the focal point of the strife today is the disputed territory of Kashmir. One of India's central contentions is that Kashmir is not an autonomous region, and that is why this conflict continues to this day. The streets of Kashmir are running with blood.

christianity did it by force the same islam did it.

so please dont overlook your history

their no notion of forced conversion in any indian faith, no promotion of slavery or slave trade, no history of religous wars against any other faith, no history of Indians invading africa, china or europe and then forcing them into their faith,


the only difference is, christianity plundered lands like america and DISLODGED , DISPLACED, MURDERED, THE NATIVES, AND created a christian taliban state for over 500years....

American only got democratic during the late 70's. When racist laws were still in existance seperating black from white.

to understand truth you need to understand history

Who said Christianity wasn't bad? All religion is bad and all of them practiced human sacrifice in the past. Human sacrifice cases occasionally make headlines in deeply religious and superstitious India today.

Human sacrifice was offered to the Moon God in the Muslim's past. Human sacrifice in Aztec culture was a religious practice and Human sacrifice was central to the Moche civilization religion.

Christian salvation is based upon eating human flesh and drinking human blood. Jesus was a story of human sacrifice and the drinking blood and eating of flesh is a ritual ripped off from Mirtha. The symbolic eating of flesh and drinking of blood was magical.

One will always find human sacrificing as a form of worship in the religions of the past. All religion is nonsense that shouldn't be listened to today except for a big belly laugh.

if you are saying that sikhism practice are dead wrong. there is no where in sikh history or scriptures where it says, "sacrifice is ok". sikhism is against sacrifice, in other words , it is against any type of killing. if you can find one scripture that supports sacrifice in sikhism, i myself will become an atheist. sikhism is the only religion that is against killing any humans, animals, whether it is sacrificial or for any other reason.

You do realize that Sikhism is a fairly new religion. so they have had a lot of opportunities to reform. The founders of this new religion could have looked at other religions and tries to improve upon them. It's better because it is supposed to be better. Just like a 10th revision of a school textbook is better than the 1st edition. Just because Sikhism has less superstitions, no sacrifices, etc, does not mean that everything in this religion is true. And there are other religions that are against killing any humans, animals, whether it is sacrificial or for any other reason such as Buddhism, Jainism, Zen which are far older than Sikhism. and Sikhs do kill in the name of their God or Guru. Even Guru Gobind was a warrior who regularly killed people.

In no way, shape or form has human sacrifice been practiced throughout the history of Sikhi.

Linda i believe u have made many valid points throughout this forum but unfortunatly for you, they have been made invalid by most posts that followed. U seem to have these rose tinted glasses which make you want to brush aside points made by sikhs which are to your disatisfaction, maybe try and see the points that are being put across for what they are.

I mean no harm or disrespect to anyone that does not to me

I beg to differ..

Let me list a few negative points about Hinduism and Hindu society...

*Caste system (racism, discrimination, slavery, violence) against "low castes" or "untouchables" such as Shudra and Achoot is entrenched in Hindu scripture and scoiety.

*Sati (burning widows ALIVE and the low status of women in general).

*Low status of women in Hindu scripture.

*Hindus weren't as peaceful as they like to pretend, Hindus were killing each other and the rajas were waging war against one another way before foreigners invaded, infact Hinduism didn't even exist as a religion before foreigners lumped all the indigeneous pagan cults together and named it Hinduism. Same goes for India, India wasn't even one country before foreigners consolidated it into a single empire.

Hindus have been just as bad as anyone else.

Hindus have burnt churches and raped Christian nuns (Orissa), killed missionaries and yet they believe all religions lead to the same path?

Hindus have burnt alive entire families of Muslims (Gujarat) and demolished mosques and turned them into Hindu temples by force and yet they believe all paths lead to the same destination.

Hindus wont eat meat and are angered when a cow is killed but they will happliy kill the Christian or Muslim butchers entire faily to avenge the cow.

Hindu extremists target non-Hindus just like the facists of any other religion.

These things are deeply entrenched in Hindu religion/scripture, modern, reform and politically correct intrepretations of Hindu scripture are a recent occurence and not genuine Hindu religion.

Ironically it was the Muslim and Christian goverments in India who civilised the Hindus to some extent by illegalising some of these practices.

Sikhism is a mixture of Islam and Hinduism, The Sikh Gurus (prophets/teachers) started it because they were greedy, power hungry control-freaks who wanted to rule.

Just like any other religion the Gurus used Sikhism (amalgam of Hinduism and Islam) to control people because they wanted to be kings and overthrow the ruling Mughals.

The Gurus were motivated by a combination of greed for power and racist contempt towards the foreign Mughal rulers (who were South-Asian born but of Persian descent).

When the Mughals executed the Gurus for rebellion and treason against the state (as any ruler would in that day and even today) they were sanctified as martyrs by their people and their cult strengthened.

I've studied Sikhism and South-Asian culture, in my youth I was attracted to Sikhism because of selective modern and egalatarian passages advertised by Sikh proselytizers as on here but...

...As I delved deeper into the meaningsof the Granth I realised it's just as absurd, irrational and unscientific as any other belief system.

I've been part of the 3HO (which is far from genuine orthodox Sikhism, a lot nicer but false and a waste of time none the less) to the stricter "orthodox" Sikhism (no murti, no yoga, no astrology types).

Those ridiculous turbans and uncut hair doesn't do anything for anyones sexiness or hygiene (BO), it was a relief to groom myself after I was done with Sikhism.

Sikhs only cling to Sikhi out of ignorance/blind-following or pride/identity.

Sikhism like any other belief system is hogwash.

The Granth is hypocritical, it is egalitarian in certain passages but then it's also very hateful and comdemning of anyone who doesn't agree with it in other passages.

I'm no proponent of Hinduism and Islam but I find Sikhism is based on hatred and condemnation of Hindus and Muslims, it creates divisions and hatred amongst humanity just like any other belief system..

Sikhs today continue to hate all Muslims for what the Mughals did to their Gurus the same as Christians hate Jews for crucifying Christ (or for handing him to the Romans)...

Sikhism itself is everything it condemns Hinduism and Islam for...

*Sikhs condemn Hindus for idolworship yet I know Sikhs who do ardaas (prayer) towards portraits of Nanank.

*Sikhs condemn Muslims for praying facing the Kaabah but Sikhs themselves prostrate to a the Granth (mere ink and paper).

*Sikhs condemn Muslim pilgrimage but they themselves go on yatra (pilgrimage) to important Gurdwaras.

*Sikhs condemn the empty rituals of other religions yet Sikhism itself is full of rituals and chants which become boring, empty and loose meaning over time.

Sikhs like everyone else should break free from the clutches of religion and the hatred it inspires..

You can carry on believing in a supreme deity if you wish but don't let your life be dictated by a book, follow your heart (it will tell you right from wrong), you don't need religious labels...

Liberate yourselves from religious labels and become one with th rest of humanity.

Whilst studying Sikhism I learnt a bit of Punjabi/Gurmukhi and I still love the Punjabi culture, music, food, dress (except for turbans :P ) but I find Sikhism as suffocating as any other religion... You can carry on being Punjabi or Jatt or whatever else it is my Indian friends pride themselves on but religion is socially divisive.

I think we are missing the point here (talking to the atheist community here).

There is MUCH to be appreciated about Sikhism and its history. Even though I agree the religion itself is 100% BS and without any evidence, Sikh social philosophy is rooted in Humanism.

First of all, as far as I can recollect, Nanak was the first male leader (in recorded history) to promote and to indeed implement equal rights for women. I am surprised that contemporary philosophers skip his name with such ease when discussing ethics and morality. You really have to go as far back as Plato and Aristotle to get even close to Nanak in this regard, and even they did not think Women were worthy of equal rights (for example Aristotle believed that the main duty of a women was to stay at home and manage the household). The fifth Guru infact trained and sent women on missions to spread the humanistic faith just as he did with the men. And no I am not presenting the 'best foot' of Sikhism, the Adi Granth is consistent in preaching equality and condemning discrimination against women.

Sikhs have a RELIGIOUS duty to protect and fight for the helpess. Through out the history the Gurus and their descendants fought for other people's (Hindu and Muslim alike) religious and personal rights. It is not Islamophoic or Anti-Hindu. Many of the verses written in the book are from Hindu and Muslim authors.

The gurus or the Adi Granth are not racist in any regards, if you still disagree please look up racism and show me how anything in the holy book fits that definition. The Granth does nothing better than condemning racial, ethnic or disrimination based on any other theories of social classes.

The thought that Nanak sought power and wealth is laughable, for most of his life he was nothing more than a wandering philosopher. If present today, he would probably be the most liberal guy out there.

I consider Sikhism a giant leap from the barbarism and superstition preached in Islam and Hinduism. The social philosophy in it was revolutionary and its willingness to stand against tyranny is awe-inspiring. Rarely in history do you get a more black-white scenario than you do in the wars fought by Sikhs against the Mughals.

Your criticism of how Sikhism is currently practices is completely fair. Nothing could be better for the Sikh diaspora than to open their scripture and actually implement what is written. I don't think this could be said about any of the other major religions.

Ath315t the ideas you have presented are absolutely in sync what I made out of Sikhism, this is the exact thinking that I have about Sikhism.

I sincerely hope, that the Indians come out of the Aryan/Non-Aryan crap that was fed to them by the British colonialists to divide them further by fueling chauvinistic flames in their hearts. Anyway, back to the point, I agree with Matt Dillahunty, Jeff Dee in that no religion can provide the burden of proof about a 'God in Heaven'. Belief in democracy, freedom of speech, choice, expression, freedom of religion, pluralism, human rights, egalitarianism etc. can all be had without adhering to "any religion" whatsoever. The Church, Temple and Mosque advocate good things too, but does that make them true benefactors of humankind, NO. Far from it. Followers of Sikhism may or may not agree, but caste** based discrimination is rampant in Punjab, where certain Sikh's murdered their sons/daughters/relatives for inter-caste marriages and the like. And that too when both parties are Sikh(can and will post details if required). No, I am not painting them all with the same brush, but any religion which brushes any such occurrences under the carpet, much like the Vatican does with pedophilia, is malevolent and biased. Despite the best efforts of Sikhs, the case system still continues to be a problem **Associated reading: Caste system in India

Sikh , Sahib Granth. Scientific problems.

The seven islands, seven seas, NINE CONTINENTS, four Vedas and eighteen Puraanas'(guru granth sahib) page 84

'The One who created the 8.4 MILLION species of beings gives sustenance to all.'(guru granth sahib) pages 27, 29, 38.

Others verses mention

The sun and the moon are lamps

Firewood breeds maggots

And much more!

Watch this youtube video

If you want to talk about scientific problems.

- The earth DOES go around the sun - In some towns in the polar regions the sun does not set for months - how did they not know that when coming up with the idea of fasting - and so on, and so on...

Ahmad: In addition to the earth going around the sun and the flawed idea of fasting til sunset, etc. Did you know the medium of computer you use to spread your word, the first computer (the Analytical Engine) was actually built by a women - Ada Lovelace? Yes a woman...

Follow us on:

twitter facebook meetup