# What Is God? Or In Which Type Of God Do You Believe?



## Chinu (Oct 29, 2011)

Well.. Myself: Chinu / M / 32, Punjab/Bathinda, Religion: Sikhism, 
Few days before i registered myslelf here, and i think this is big luck for me that am between you all here in a hope that i'll get my religious answers which i was seeking from a very long time.

So... my first question is:
What is God ? or In which type of God do you believe in ? How and why ?

But as a answer please don't keep the steeks of gurbani in front of me, ie: "Eakomkaar satnaam kartapurakh........and so on", because this is not our own realizeation, please give me what you have realized your own.

For the mean time "Satshriakal".


----------



## Harry Haller (Oct 29, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

Welcome Chinuji

I believe a persons idea of god is extremely personal, mine is quite boring to be honest, 

Firstly I have an aversion to the use of the word god, as I find it deeply Abrahamic, so my name for 'god' would be Creator. The relationship I have with Creator is defined by my interaction with creation, animals, humans, trees, anything that has the essence of Creator within, I do not talk with Creator, other than the essence in my head, with whom I converse more than I do with real people, I certainly do not ask Creator for anything, or 'pray' for things.

I believe that the way in which you live, think and speak defines in effect how your respect to Creator is shown, like many, I am swayed by some of the five thieves, but contemplation of effects, and weighing up the pros and cons, tends to keep me largely on the right track, I hope!

I do not believe Creator has any interest in me, other than expecting me to live my life to its fullest potential within the boundaries of Sikhi, I certainly do not do actions to please Creator, although pleasing the  essence of Creator I find  in creation makes me very happy

So, my 'god' is a non interventionist god with little interest in me, whom I do not pray to, or talk to, my prayers are done through actions, I am a huge fan of Sewa, but not Simran, I despise ritual of any sort that is designed to ensure a certain outcome, I never blame 'god' nor do I question 'god', I believe that the SGGS contains the tools we need to live a good and happy life, and connect ourselves with Creator and creation.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Oct 29, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



			
				Chinu said:
			
		

> please give me what you have realized your own


 
Veera No one can give you what they have realised,only one in a million realises and when that one does he keeps quiet about it,because no one else can really understand their realisation.


----------



## Chinu (Oct 29, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



harry haller said:


> Welcome Chinuji
> 
> I believe a persons idea of god is extremely personal, mine is quite boring to be honest,
> 
> ...


Very nice to meet you -- harry -- and thanks for the valuable reply.

Chinu.


----------



## Chinu (Oct 29, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



Scarlet Pimpernel said:


> Veera No one can give you what they have realised,only one in a million realises and when that one does he keeps quiet about it,because no one else can really understand their realisation.


Its ok... but from where and how you realized all this -- which you have written above ? let me.. to reach the stage of understandings where you are now.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Oct 29, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



> Its ok... but from where and how you realized all this -- which you have written above ? let me


 
Veera, realisation to me is very high state ,you might not have used the term as I understand it ,but if your question is more about what one has come to learn or aquired knowledge as to the general way of proceeding ,then absorbing those lines of Gurbani which you did not want quoted is essential. Many seem to believe they can understand God without the Guru,that surprises me because what would the Word of any faith be intended for, if not to facilitate realisation or understanding.
The fact most Sikhs have never read their own Guru's word or cultivated any love for it also saddens me.
But this is the same for most faiths ,most muslims have never read the Koran and probably most Christians have not read the Bible enough to quote passages. 
The strange thing about faith is that even without reading what I would deem prescribed reading many people are still very Sikh,Christian or Muslim, in so much as they are still very compassionate ,moral and further believe in what is an Eternal Distinct Entity, although they might not describe it as such.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Oct 29, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



Chinu said:


> Well.. Myself: Chinu / M / 32, Punjab/Bathinda, Religion: Sikhism,
> Few days before i registered myslelf here, and i think this is big luck for me that am between you all here in a hope that i'll get my religious answers which i was seeking from a very long time.
> 
> So... my first question is:
> ...


Chinu veer welcome to spn.  mundahug

I have very little to add to what veer Harry said in the post above (http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/general-discussion/37386-what-god-type-god-do-you.html#post155628).  That is how I feel.

I do pray and in a way such a prayer is to self and the soul within as a reminder.  I pray for wellness of all, sometimes specific and always seeking that I may not do bad against anyone.  This for me is not a statement to God/creator but us reminding ourselves with the gift that we are from one creator.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Harry Haller (Oct 30, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



Chinu said:


> Its ok... but from where and how you realized all this -- which you have written above ? let me.. to reach the stage of understandings where you are now.



Chinuji

I am afraid I am still far away from understanding, all I have is awareness at this stage, although I am optimistic I am approaching a stage of understanding., 

All it takes to reach a stage of awareness in my opinion is to take a good hard look at yourself and realise who you are, unfortunately, only you can do this, we are all different, what excites and depresses me are going to be different to the things that excite and depress you, my advice would be to come to some sort of peace with yourself, and your thieves, be honest about yourself, be true to yourself, it is pointless trying to change yourself to be someone else, only when we look in the mirror and see every person within us, and be able to love the good and control the bad, are we then ready to move on to the next step. 

The next step is to embrace Creator and Creation, but even that is personal, some pray, some do sewa, some feel the pain in every living being and have to do something about it, some guide others, every one of us has our own role to play in this great opera, we all have the ability to be the in the starring role, some will be famous for being good, some will be famous for being thief led, but we all have a role to play, and in serving Creation and Creator there are many many many ways to fulfill that, in my humble view

Every day is a journey, and every day should be savoured, enjoy the journey, its all we have


----------



## Chinu (Oct 31, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



Scarlet Pimpernel said:


> Veera, realisation to me is very high state ,you might not have used the term as I understand it ,but if your question is more about what one has come to learn or aquired knowledge as to the general way of proceeding ,then absorbing those lines of Gurbani which you did not want quoted is essential. Many seem to believe they can understand God without the Guru,that surprises me because what would the Word of any faith be intended for, if not to facilitate realisation or understanding.
> The fact most Sikhs have never read their own Guru's word or cultivated any love for it also saddens me.
> But this is the same for most faiths ,most muslims have never read the Koran and probably most Christians have not read the Bible enough to quote passages.
> The strange thing about faith is that even without reading what I would deem prescribed reading many people are still very Sikh,Christian or Muslim, in so much as they are still very compassionate ,moral and further believe in what is an Eternal Distinct Entity, although they might not describe it as such.


So.. Scarlet do you mean to say that -- Source of your spiritual understandings or everybody's understandings are just Holy-Books, nothing else ?


----------



## Chinu (Oct 31, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



Ambarsaria said:


> Chinu veer welcome to spn. mundahug


Nice to meet you. 0



> I have very little to add to what veer Harry said in the post above (http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/general-discussion/37386-what-god-type-god-do-you.html#post155628). That is how I feel.
> 
> I do pray and in a way such a prayer is to self and the soul within as a reminder. I pray for wellness of all, sometimes specific and always seeking that I may not do bad against anyone. This for me is not a statement to God/creator but us reminding ourselves with the gift that we are from one creator.
> 
> Sat Sri Akal.


Good. 0

"Satsriakal"


----------



## Chinu (Oct 31, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



harry haller said:


> Chinuji
> 
> I am afraid I am still far away from understanding, all I have is awareness at this stage, although I am optimistic I am approaching a stage of understanding.,


That we all are........ i think. 0 


> All it takes to reach a stage of awareness in my opinion is to take a good hard look at yourself and realise who you are, unfortunately, only you can do this, we are all different, what excites and depresses me are going to be different to the things that excite and depress you, my advice would be to come to some sort of peace with yourself, and your thieves, be honest about yourself, be true to yourself, it is pointless trying to change yourself to be someone else, only when we look in the mirror and see every person within us, and be able to love the good and control the bad, are we then ready to move on to the next step.


0 


> The next step is to embrace Creator and Creation, but even that is personal, some pray, some do sewa, some feel the pain in every living being and have to do something about it, some guide others, every one of us has our own role to play in this great opera, we all have the ability to be the in the starring role, some will be famous for being good, some will be famous for being thief led, but we all have a role to play, and in serving Creation and Creator there are many many many ways to fulfill that, in my humble view


Really i enjoyed a lot reading all this. 0 


> Every day is a journey, and every day should be savoured, enjoy the journey, its all we have


Are you not fed up -- from this long long journey ?

Chinu.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Oct 31, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



> Scarlet do you mean to say that -- Source of your spiritual understandings or everybody's understandings are just Holy-Books, nothing else


 
Veera I believe that Holy Books should inform your understanding and not vice versa.


----------



## Harry Haller (Oct 31, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

_Are you not fed up -- from this long long journey ?_

fed up? what is there to be fed up with brother?

Every day I get a bit closer to enlightenment, every day there are more ways to put what I have learned into practice, to learn something, and see it working in front of your very eyes is magical, at present, I am learning to replace my lust with love, and it is hugely interesting and enlightening, to observe the different reactions in my wife as I replace a thief with a virtue is truly one of those wow moments, and that is what makes the journey so great, to have more wow moments than 'sigh' moments, its all down to the seeds you plant every day, if your life is making you fed up, then you are planting the wrong seeds, a man can have the biggest car, the nicest house, the sexiest wife, but if there is no love or truth in his life, then he will approach a stage of being fed up, yet a man can have little money, a loving wife, a small house and no car, but as long as he has love and truth in his heart, and earns his money honestly,  he will have no fear, he will plant good seeds, every day will be a good harvest, he will reap what he sows, he will find peace, contentment, he will realise there is more to life than buying cars for others to be jealous of, of having a huge house that people covet, of having a wife dripping in gold, 

There is nothing wrong in having money, cars, houses, as long as it is for the right reasons, if the reasons are to get as much balleh balleh from others, then that in my view, is wrong, if it is because you work hard, and have goals, and are able to share your wealth along the way, then great, 

I often think that life should be lived as if you were on a desert island, live for yourself, not other people, in this vein, many of the things we do become pointless as there is no audience, we end up doing the practical, the pragmatic, the look of love in a the eyes of a ferret that has just been fed and watered and cuddled mean more than the look of envy in the eyes of society

hope that helps,


----------



## Ambarsaria (Oct 31, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

Harry veer ji absolutely wonderful post.  We should get our DNA checked in case we are real life twins as I at times think 100% like you mundahug.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Oct 31, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

CHINU Ji,
First you may pl define as to what is GOD according to you.And what are the types of GOD you know.After knowing this I think anyone will be able to give most appropriate answer you may be looking for.

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Chinu (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



prakash.s.bagga said:


> CHINU Ji,
> First you may pl define as to what is GOD according to you.


The one who has created all this.


> And what are the types of GOD you know.


I don't know, but i think there's only One. 


> After knowing this I think anyone will be able to give most appropriate answer you may be looking for.


Hope soon.


> Prakash.S.Bagga


Chinu.
"Satshriakal"


----------



## Chinu (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



harry haller said:


> _Are you not fed up -- from this long long journey ?_
> 
> fed up? what is there to be fed up with brother?
> 
> ...


Its good and happy lifestyle, chinu don't want to disturb all this.
So.. for the mean time -- very nice to have talk with you... Have a happy life.

"Satshriakal"


----------



## Chinu (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



Scarlet Pimpernel said:


> Veera I believe that Holy Books should inform your understanding and not vice versa.


Ok from where all that holy books came ?


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

CHINu Ji,
It is good that you are aware  there is some"ONE" for creation of all this.
When you are asking for the source of Holy Book Similarly I think you can start your journey for knowing your own source then you can realise Source of Holy Bokks and that yours are same and that same is ONE you may be looking for.
 As per my understanding the source of every creation is a SINGLE WAVE OF ONE DIVINE WORD.Try to realise this DIVINE WORD.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Astroboy (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

There are many kinds of God's out there, just as mysterious as the one who threw an empty Cola Cola bottle from the plane - which landed amongst am African tribe. And see what came of from this mysterious gift.


----------



## Chinu (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



prakash.s.bagga said:


> As per my understanding the source of every creation is a SINGLE WAVE OF ONE DIVINE WORD.Try to realise this DIVINE WORD.
> Prakash.S.Bagga


Have you realise this "Divine Word" ?


----------



## Chinu (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



Astroboy said:


> There are many kinds of God's out there, just as mysterious as the one who threw an empty Cola Cola bottle from the plane - which landed amongst am African tribe. And see what came of from this mysterious gift.


Actually... what do you want to say ?


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

CHINU Ji,
I have known this DIVINE WORD by the grace of my SatiGuRu  and now I am on the path of realising this.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Chinu (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



prakash.s.bagga said:


> CHINU Ji,
> I have known this DIVINE WORD by the grace of my SatiGuRu and now I am on the path of realising this.
> Prakash.S.Bagga


Who is your respected SatiGuRu ?


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

CHINU Ji,
Are you taking my interview.?
My Sati GuRu is A SINGLE WAVE OF DIVINE WORD.....Try to understand this.

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Chinu (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



prakash.s.bagga said:


> CHINU Ji,
> Are you taking my interview.?


No bagga ji no... am just asking you.


> My Sati GuRu is A SINGLE WAVE OF DIVINE WORD.....Try to understand this.
> Prakash.S.Bagga


Bagga ji.. firstly you said i have known this "Divine Word", Secondly you said with the grace of my satiguru, Thirdly you said still am on the path of realising.

If "Divine Word" is your satiguru and you are known to him than why you are still on the path of realising, If you are known to your satiguru "Divine Word" further what to realise then ?


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

CHINU Ji,
Probably this is the way the whole world is moving.
Can you define your "ONE " you are aware of"

Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Chinu (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



prakash.s.bagga said:


> CHINU Ji,
> Probably this is the way the whole world is moving.
> Can you define your "ONE " you are aware of"
> Prakash.S.Bagga


0 Bagga ji, i think the whole world is moving by LOVE.


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

CHINTU Ji,
The whole world is created by the effect of LOVE.But the whole world is moving 
by the effect of CONFUSION..
LOVE is not ABSOLUTE and is not TANGIBLE whereas THE ONE is ABSOLUTE AND TANGIBLE.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## Harry Haller (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

Prakashiji

Do you mean tangible through creation?


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Nov 1, 2011)

*re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

HARRY HALLER Ji,

You are right but even by itself as THE WORD GuRoo.

Prakash.s.Bagga


----------



## Astroboy (Nov 2, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



Chinu said:


> Actually... what do you want to say ?



I believe in a God which is as mysterious as my imagination.


----------



## Harry Haller (Nov 2, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

Astroboyji

I envy your imagination, its obviously more broad than mine


----------



## ohhcuppycakee (Nov 2, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

I believe in one god, no partners, gender-less, formless, and above comprehension.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Nov 2, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



ohhcuppycakee said:


> I believe in one god, no partners, gender-less, formless, and above comprehension.


ohhcuppycakee sister ji that is wonderfully succinct.  Sikhism states the same.  I do know people have (even Sikhs) different ways of describing it at a personal level.

The only part about form-less is viewed by some that there is form and the form is all creation.  Which could be argued to be equivalent to form less as all of creation cannot be defined by us or anyone.

Thank you.


----------



## SIKS SINGH (Nov 2, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

I ask for the Universal creator the one, to be the light at the end of my life to free me from births and from deaths and keep me, at his feet, for he is mighty and graceful and there is no other than the true creator - LOOK around you, see god - dwell within your mind but free your sould to explore the vastness of the Creator and his Universe - for there are as many galaxies as there are grains of SAND on this Earth within his/her creation.

My God resides in my heart and in everything I see and do, but I am still the lowest of the low and the poorest of the poor as I have been born again - please GOD SET ME FREE in this lifetime.

God bless you all

May you all be freed from cycle of births and deaths and attain the spiritual love to allow us to all see the Universal creator in all its glory.


----------



## Astroboy (Nov 2, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



harry haller said:


> Astroboyji
> 
> I envy your imagination, its obviously more broad than mine



Harry Ji,

I wonder why you say that? My imagination runs wild and is uncontrollable. Only the way-shower can point in the direction, which is inwards. Gurbani says, everything is within and not outside. If we search from the outside, we are in delusion.


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Nov 3, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



Chinu said:


> So... my first question is:
> 
> What is God ?


Figment of human imagination.


----------



## Harry Haller (Nov 3, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

skepticfreethinkerji/harry puttarji

many thanks for your useful insight into the debate at hand, would that be a figment of your personal imagination, or human imagination per se?


----------



## Chinu (Nov 3, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



prakash.s.bagga said:


> CHINTU Ji,
> The whole world is created by the effect of LOVE.But the whole world is moving
> by the effect of CONFUSION..
> LOVE is not ABSOLUTE and is not TANGIBLE whereas THE ONE is ABSOLUTE AND TANGIBLE.
> Prakash.S.Bagga


So... Bagga ji this means, we all are living in a big confusion,...and relatively, what we all think or what we all decide... is also a big confusion,...because the result of confusion is also confusion ? right.

Thus... Considering all this, as the result of confusion is always confusion, how can be so surely you say... that what all you have written above, or what you think ... is not a confusion ? 

OR... Do you live out of this Confusion? or illusion ? or..are you that "ONE" which are talking about ? tell me...0

Anyways... bagga ji, my personal understanding is that the whole world is moving with the effect of "LOVE", Yes! The mode of "LOVE" can be wrong ie: Mother "LOVE" his child... yes it creates a "False attachment", but the state of "Love" is pure... so its a wrong mode of love, 

Another example: A buisnessman "LOVE" money... yes it creates a "Greed" but the state of love is pure ... so its a wrong mode of love, 

One more example:Now... *Chinu* "LOVE" to give a impressable reply... yes this creates a "EGo",but the state of love is pure, So this is also a wrong mode of love i think... 0

But... "Love" is "Love" Bagga ji, Everything is moving for "LOVE" Yes! the mode can be wrong.

Chinu.


----------



## Chinu (Nov 3, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



Astroboy said:


> I believe in a God which is as mysterious as my imagination.


Astro ji... you are not in the mood of exploring your divine mystery... i think.0

Nevertheless... i'll love hear a song, if you can sing any.. ?

Nicetomeetyou....."Satshriakal".


----------



## Chinu (Nov 3, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



skeptic.freethinker1 said:


> Figment of human imagination.


Your answer is right on your side... i think.
Moreover... who can stop you to believe like this ? Right ?, Yes! there's no medicine made in the entire world, to change "Believes" of any kind, Atheistic and Theistic too...

Chinu


----------



## Chinu (Nov 3, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



ohhcuppycakee said:


> I believe in one god, no partners, gender-less, formless, and above comprehension.


Nice... Believes.


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Nov 3, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



harry haller said:


> many thanks for your useful insight into the debate at hand,



You are welcome. It's good to have a fresh perspective.



harry haller said:


> would that be a figment of your personal imagination, or human imagination per se?



That would be human imagination, since humans were imagining up gods much before I was born. 
Thousands of years ago Egyptians 'imagined' up the God of Magic-Isis and God of creation-Amun besides many others. Hindu mythology came up with Vishnu and Shiva. Aztecs came up with their own set of gods.

So yes, I meant figment of 'human' imagination, not my personal imagination. I don't believe in Tooth fairy, Santa Claus or any other imaginary thing anymore.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Nov 3, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or in which type of God do You Believe?*

Chinu ji I thank you explicitly for your respectfully thought provoking contributions in this thread.  You are a very wise old man/woman in your sixties mundahug.  Just pulling your leg.  If you are much younger you are a very bright person and much brighter than me when I was younger.:sippingcoffeemunda:

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Harry Haller (Nov 3, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



skeptic.freethinker1 said:


> You are welcome. It's good to have a fresh perspective.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




May I ask then what your contribution to this forum is? do you wish to be proved wrong, or do you wish to prove that you are right?, I would welcome the debate, provided you are able to provide some substance to your argument, also which of your names should I address you by?


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Nov 3, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



skeptic.freethinker1 said:


> Figment of human imagination.



Skeptic.freethinker1 ji,

Guru Fateh.

How does your personal figment of your human imagination describe God? Please share with us because he/she/it can mean many different things to different people.

Thanks & regards

Tejwant Singh


----------



## prakash.s.bagga (Nov 3, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or in which type of God do You Believe?*

CHINTU Ji,
I never said that I am right.It is your own conclusion and this is nothing but may be your confusion.
But for one thing I am very sure that My GuRu is always right.I learn from my GuRu that the whole world is in confusion.
Prakash.S.Bagga


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



harry haller said:


> May I ask then what your contribution to this forum is? do you wish to be proved wrong, or do you wish to prove that you are right?, I would welcome the debate, provided you are able to provide some substance to your argument, also which of your names should I address you by?



Harry Ji,

You can call me Skeptic.Freethinker.
I don't 'wish' to be proven wrong but if I say something which is incorrect I hope someone corrects me. 

I was merely trying to emphasize that discussing "What is God" is akin to discussing the color and shape of a Giant Teacup lying on the surface of moon. Some might believe it is red and some might believe it is blue. But none of it matters since the teacup doesn't exist.


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

skepticfreethinker ji

Thank you but you have made your point. And you have made this same point many times on several of our threads about atheism and the existence of God. No need to repeat yourself.

This thread is sent into a tangent if we talk about whether God exists. This thread assumes that some interest is there by members who do believe there is a God (notice I did not use the word "exist" but the word "is") and might like to express their views on the subject. Everything else is semantics.

Do not continue debating the existence of God on this thread. Thank you/spnadmin


----------



## Ambarsaria (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



skeptic.freethinker1 said:


> Harry Ji,
> 
> You can call me Skeptic.Freethinker.
> I don't 'wish' to be proven wrong but if I say something which is incorrect I hope someone corrects me.
> ...


Skeptic.Freethinker ji thanks for your post.  Perhaps we can look at it another way.  

Let us not discuss or look for or try to define God/Creator for a moment.

Do you believe there is some system, some law, some set of mechanisms or relationships that allow or are the basis of the Universe with limited knowledge that we will ever possess?

Based on your response I will add and see if we can work things out.  However if your answer to each of the aspects in my questions is no, then perhaps I will scratch my head again!

This is not a trap just trying to refine our communication and see if we are contributing to the interactions in this topic.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



spnadmin said:


> skepticfreethinker ji
> 
> Do not continue debating the existence of God on this thread. Thank you/spnadmin



I would consider this an admin warning and try to refrain from debating any such thing in this thread.
I was just about done writing a response to another member's post, but I won't post it now because I don't want to loose my privileges on the forum. These privileges are all I haveicecreammunda


----------



## spnadmin (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*

skepticfreethinker ji

I realize that and the first posts made sense in context. I am asking that we don't go off topic as we proceed. Thank you


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



Ambarsaria said:


> Do you believe there is some system, some law, some set of mechanisms or relationships that allow or are the basis of the Universe with limited knowledge that we will ever possess?


Ambarsaria Ji,
Yes. Universe is governed by the laws of Physics. We have explanations for most of these laws and for the ones we don't, science is still working on those.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



skeptic.freethinker1 said:


> Ambarsaria Ji,
> Yes. Universe is governed by the laws of _Physics_. We have explanations for most of these laws and for the ones we don't, science is still working on those.


skeptic.freethinker1 ji thanks for your answer.  Is it just physics or all of Chemistry, Mathematics, and other sciences that we have named and many sciences that may still be without a name?

<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>  <w:WordDocument>   <w:View>Normal</w:View>   <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>   <wunctuationKerning/>   <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>   <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>   <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>   <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>   <w:Compatibility>    <w:BreakWrappedTables/>    <w:SnapToGridInCell/>    <w:WrapTextWithPunct/>    <w:UseAsianBreakRules/>    <wontGrowAutofit/>    <w:UseFELayout/>   </w:Compatibility>   <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>  </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>  <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">  </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style>  /* Style Definitions */  table.MsoNormalTable     {mso-style-name:"Table Normal";     mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;     mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;     mso-style-noshow:yes;     mso-style-parent:"";     mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;     mso-para-margin:0in;     mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;     mso-pagination:widow-orphan;     font-size:10.0pt;     font-family:"Times New Roman";     mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";     mso-ansi-language:#0400;     mso-fareast-language:#0400;     mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->    





> *ੴ**ਸਤਿ**ਨਾਮੁ ਕਰਤਾ ਪੁਰਖੁ ਨਿਰਭਉ ਨਿਰਵੈਰੁ ਅਕਾਲ ਮੂਰਤਿ ਅਜੂਨੀ ਸੈਭੰ ਗੁਰ ਪ੍ਰਸਾਦਿ ॥*
> 
> *ArQ:- * Akwl purK ie`k hY, ijs dw nwm 'hoNd vwlw' hY jo isRStI dw rcnhwr hY, jo sB ivc ivAwpk hY, BY qoN rihq hY, vYr-rihq hY, ijs dw srUp kwl qoN pry hY, (Bwv, ijs dw srIr nws-rihq hY), jo jUnW ivc nhIN AwauNdw, ijs dw pRkwS Awpxy Awp qoN hoieAw hY Aqy jo siqgurU dI ikrpw nwl imldw hY[
> 
> God/creator is one and is known as the eternal being, the creator of all, present everywhere, without fear, without animosity, is timeless, is not guided by life cycles, is a self creation and is realized through its own (God/creator) blessing.


If we were to take all science has discovered and all hypotheisis unproven or unthought of, and call it a collective "One Eternal Truth".  Such being  subjectively experienced by humans as described above.

What will be the issue as the above excerpt just initiates description and understanding of Creator in Sikhism while warning that full would never be known?

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



Ambarsaria said:


> <!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>  <w:WordDocument>   <w:View>Normal</w:View>   <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>   <wunctuationKerning/>   <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>   <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>   <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>   <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>   <w:Compatibility>    <w:BreakWrappedTables/>    <w:SnapToGridInCell/>    <w:WrapTextWithPunct/>    <w:UseAsianBreakRules/>    <wontGrowAutofit/>    <w:UseFELayout/>   </w:Compatibility>   <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>  </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>  <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">  </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style>  /* Style Definitions */  table.MsoNormalTable     {mso-style-name:"Table Normal";     mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;     mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;     mso-style-noshow:yes;     mso-style-parent:"";     mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;     mso-para-margin:0in;     mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;     mso-pagination:widow-orphan;     font-size:10.0pt;     font-family:"Times New Roman";     mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";     mso-ansi-language:#0400;     mso-fareast-language:#0400;     mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->    If we were to take all science has discovered and all hypotheisis unproven or unthought of, and call it a collective "One Eternal Truth".  Such being  subjectively experienced by humans as described above.



Ambarsaria Ji,

If you are defining the collective knowledge of all sciences(known and to be discovered) as "One eternal Truth", then I totally agree with you. If you want to call it 'God' then be it. I have to say I don't have any issue with this description. In fact I have never seen anyone put it in such a beautiful and succinct manner. I wish we can have more people like you on the forum.

But I agree with you only as long as your definition of God remains limited to what is quoted above. If you are defining God as anything more or as something that listens or answers our prayers or as a being that created the universe then I have to disagree.

I also take bit of an exception to the part where you say "full would never be known". If all the scientists working hard to improve our lives start believing this, it would be a big setback to all scientific research. I think it might take hundred or maybe thousand years but full would be known ultimately.And I am still talking about the "One Eternal Truth- The collective knowledge of all sciences"

Thanks & Regards.


----------



## Chinu (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or in which type of God do You Believe?*



Ambarsaria said:


> Chinu ji I thank you explicitly for your respectfully thought provoking contributions in this thread. You are a very wise old man/woman in your sixties mundahug. Just pulling your leg. If you are much younger you are a very bright person and much brighter than me when I was younger.:sippingcoffeemunda:
> 
> Sat Sri Akal.


) Who says that... Now you are old.
Your name is Ambarsaria, Really... do you belong to Amritsar ?


----------



## Chinu (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or in which type of God do You Believe?*



prakash.s.bagga said:


> CHINTU Ji,
> I never said that I am right.


Bagga ji... as your respected GuRu is there -- so how can you be right ?..... right ?


> It is your own conclusion and this is nothing but may be your confusion.


May be... How can i disagree with this? -- as i wrote this myself.


> But for one thing I am very sure that My GuRu is always right.I learn from my GuRu that the whole world is in confusion.
> Prakash.S.Bagga


O..Yes! i just forgot -- he is only your GuRu -- not OUR, and in this way, you are right... Bagga ji, infact everbody in this world is right in this way.

In this way..who is wrong ?


----------



## BhagatSingh (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



skeptic.freethinker1 said:


> Ambarsaria Ji,
> 
> If you are defining the collective knowledge of all sciences(known and to be discovered) as "One eternal Truth", then I totally agree with you. If you want to call it 'God' then be it. I have to say I don't have any issue with this description. In fact I have never seen anyone put it in such a beautiful and succinct manner. I wish we can have more people like you on the forum.
> 
> ...


Pardon me Freethinker ji but I think you misread Ambarsari ji's post.
I believe he said One Eternal Truth that is not limited to the realm of science but includes the truths of science - the unsolved mysteries - among other things.

To put it bluntly, Science does not have a grasp of everything, it never will. (It does not attempt to study everything nor does it try to cover all the fields of study.) Limiting your understanding of Truth to just science is not wise. (Even scientists don't do this. They know the progress of science will stop if they limit their conception of truth to just what science is sure about. That's why Einstein said "Imagination if more important than knowledge") Now of course, science is quite useful, especially for developing powerful models of the world. But these models do not explain the world (they certainly attempt to and seem like they do). And certainly do not "explain it away". Our world cannot be "explained away". It is too vast for that. The more you look at something, he more you study something, the more there is look at and study. The more you explain, the more there is to explain. On top of that each explanation must be explained then that explanation must be explained and so on and so forth. You see it? So "explaining it away" is impossible. The vastness is incomprehensible. It can only be tasted so to speak. It can only be tasted through living in it - through our perception, our awareness. Whether that comes from science or whether it comes from art is up to the individual and their circumstances. But one thing is for certain, it arises from lived experience of our world.

When such perception reaches its heights. When the five senses are flooded with PURE perception, without blockage, without mental noise from thoughts and analysis. It is only then we get a taste of the Eternal Truth. We get a taste of this vastness. Only when you taste the vastness of it will you see where I am really getting at when I say: Out of this perception, sciences and all other fields of study emerge. It is out of this field of Truth that we get 





> listens or  answers our prayers or as a being that created the universe


Truth is self-existent. Nothing makes the Truth, true. It is is true of its own accord. Truth and universe manifest simultaneously. Who knows which came first, though it does not matter, as they are the one and the same. This is the same as "being". To be. The universe is.

Now of course, what you think of as "answering" prayers" maybe an entirely different notion than mine or someone else. However, both notions arose from the being. Without being how could such notions arise? If being is real, is reality, then such notions on some level are also reality. (Different levels of reality - too vast for human comprehension)

Thus we have a few words now that essentially hint at the same thing. Pure perception, Being, Truth/Eternal Truth, Universe, Reality. We may say these are hints to the God problem.


----------



## Harry Haller (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



skeptic.freethinker1 said:


> Ambarsaria Ji,
> 
> If you are defining the collective knowledge of all sciences(known and to be discovered) as "One eternal Truth", then I totally agree with you. If you want to call it 'God' then be it. I have to say I don't have any issue with this description. In fact I have never seen anyone put it in such a beautiful and succinct manner. I wish we can have more people like you on the forum.
> 
> ...



Skeptic.freethinkerji, 

I completely agree with your first paragraph, I partially agree with your second paragraph, I certainly do not believe that god listens, but that is my own perspective, I do believe that Creator as I like to refer to the almighty, gave the universe tools to create itself, this is why silkhism sits side by side with science, not against it. 

As for the full never being known, discovery is a bit like cutting the heads of a hydra, as soon as we know the full, the full will open the door to more discovery and more questions, it is a never ending journey that can never be completed, one door only opens another 10. In fact, you could say the more we know, the more we are aware of that we do not know. 

The universe has been going now for some time, I cannot see what difference at this time point in time, another hundred or thousand years will make to our sum of understanding, in the lifetime of the universe this represents a mere blip. 

I have always enjoyed the quality of your posts, well written on the whole and thoughtful,  this is good debating if it makes us both think and we can focus on the subject at hand 0


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



BhagatSingh said:


> Pardon me Freethinker ji but I think you misread Ambarsari ji's post.
> I believe he said One Eternal Truth that is not limited to the realm of science but includes the truths of science - the unsolved mysteries - among other things.


Bhagat Singh Ji,

You are right. This is what Amarsari Ji said and this is what I read it as. This is why in the very first line of my post I referred to scientific knowledge that we currently have and the knowledge "to be discovered".



BhagatSingh said:


> To put it bluntly, Science does not have a grasp of everything, it never will.


I have to respectfully disagree on this. This thought right here can push us back into the Dark Age.
If the scientific pioneers throughout our history would have thought on these lines, we would still be living without electricity thinking that our planet is flat. 
Science does not claim to know everything. But that does not mean God is the answer to all unknowns. 
Thousand years ago people thought that Gods made the rivers flow and Gods made the Sun rise and glow. Now we know better. 
Till few hundred years back people thought that Gods caused the plagues. Now we know better. Similarly we have lot of unknowns now which people easily 'explain away' with God and Metaphysics. Given enough time, science will explain that too. 

If God is needed to explain all the gaps in our current knowledge, then this God of gaps will keep shrinking as Science progresses.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



skeptic.freethinker1 said:


> I have to respectfully disagree on this. _This thought right here can push us back into the Dark Age._
> If the scientific pioneers throughout our history would have thought on these lines, we would still be living without electricity thinking that our planet is flat.


skeptic.freethinker1 ji thanks for your post.  Perhaps one comment to clarify on the above point.

_The thought of never fully understanding can be taken in two different ways. One as per your comment and one per mine here.  The way I understand it as I posted from Gurbani is that it challenges us to always have a mindset to discover more.  Continue on all journeys of discovery including science defined and science undefined right now.  Don't believe in hocus-pocus but continue till you discover the truth.  Discover more, and more, and more.  The more you discover the more one will have abilities to live in consonance with all that is around in the Universe.  If that is not a positive message then I don't know what is.  This gives Sikhism the roots for an evergreen future for those who care to understand._

This is my God/Creator and this is the one I believe in.

Humbly submitted for discourse.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



Ambarsaria said:


> _The thought of never fully understanding can be taken in two different ways. One as per your comment and one per mine here.  The way I understand it as I posted from Gurbani is that it challenges us to always have a mindset to discover more.  Continue on all journeys of discovery including science defined and science undefined right now.  Don't believe in hocus-pocus but continue till you discover the truth.  Discover more, and more, and more.  The more you discover the more one will have abilities to live in consonance with all that is around in the Universe.  If that is not a positive message then I don't know what is._



Ambarsaria Ji,
If this is what you meant by "full would never be known" then I fully agree with you. Constant craving for knowledge is what drives the scientific progress.



Ambarsaria said:


> This is my God/Creator and this is the one I believe in.


Nice to know this. I call this scientific knowledge because people attach many other connotations with the word 'God'. Again these might just be semantics.

Glad to see that we could agree.


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or in which type of God do You Believe?*

Skeptic.Freethinker ji,

Guru Fateh.

I am still waiting for the response of the question I posted.

Would appreciate it so we can interact on this matter.

Tejwant Singh


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or in which type of God do You Believe?*



Tejwant Singh said:


> I am still waiting for the response of the question I posted.



Tejwant Ji,

As I mentioned in my post to Spnadmin Ji, I had typed in a response but since she requested me not to pursue that line of thought, I did not post.

Your question was around how I describe God?
In my response, considering Spnadmin Ji's request, I will have to refer you back to my post to Harry Haller Ji where I gave an example of teacup. It was Post#49. Specifically read the last line.


----------



## Tejwant Singh (Nov 4, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or in which type of God do You Believe?*

Skeptic.freethinker1 ji.

Guru Fateh.

You write:



> Some might believe it is red and some might believe it is blue. But none of it matters since the teacup doesn't exist.


Is it possible that you may be in the wrong forum because Sikhi has no God to start with because God is a personified deity and Sikhi has none of that, hence it has nothing to do with the above claim of yours as far as Sikhi is concerned?

I have no idea how much you know about Sikhi, Ik Ong Kaar is in the wow and awe factors that surround us and Guru Nanak himself said that the Universe is ever expanding 500 some years ago and that too without the help of any telescope because he could see it while looking at the sky and using his sense of pragmatism on which Sikhi is based. I assure you that no white bearded man in a long white dress came and whispered that in his ears.

Sikhi breeds free thinkers and open mindedness which require a bit of skepticism anyway.

If you have any questions about Sikhi, please do not hesitate to ask.

Regards

Tejwant Singh


----------



## skeptic.freethinker1 (Nov 5, 2011)

*Re: What is God ? or in which type of God do You Believe?*

Tejwant Ji,


Tejwant Singh said:


> Sikhi has no God to start with because God is a personified deity and Sikhi has none of that


If this is indeed true then I think I agree with this part of Sikh philosophy. Thanks for clarifying that the term 'God' refers to a personified deity. I have seen many people on this forum and outside using 'God' to refer to other abstract concepts like 'knowledge' and energy.



Tejwant Singh said:


> Is it possible that you may be in the wrong forum because Sikhi has no God to start with


I think you are right. We all seem to be in the wrong sub-forum because this thread is probably in the wrong sub-forum. The thread is titled 'What is God' and the Sub-forum's name is 'Sikh Sikhi Sikhism'. Since Sikhism does not have any concept of God, the thread does not seem to belong in this sub-forum, but it is for the admins to decide which thread belongs where.
 In fact it's weird that there are so many threads discussing God in this very sub-forum of 'Sikh Sikhi Sikhism'. There is even a sticky thread on the top titled 'Meditation on God's help'. 

Thanks for clarifying this aspect of Sikh religion. I appreciate it.


----------



## HarjinderSinghKandola (Jan 3, 2012)

*Re: What is God ? or in which type of God do You Believe?*

If,  as you believe, there is an almighty, omnipresent, omniscient and  omnipotent God-who created the earth or world, please let me know why  did he create it ? This world of woes and miseries, a veritable, eternal  combination of numberless tragedies: Not a single soul being perfectly  satisfied.
Pray,  don't say that it is His Law: If he is bound by any law, he is not  omnipotent. He is another slave like ourselves. Please don't say that it  is his enjoyment. Nero burnt one Rome. He killed a very limited number  of people. He created very few tragedies, all to his perfect enjoyment.  And what is his place in History? By what names do the historians  mention him? All the venomous epithets are showered upon him. Pages are  blackened with invective diatribes condemning Nero, the tyrant, the  heartless, the wicked.
One  Changezkhan sacrificed a few thousand lives to seek pleasure in it and  we hate the very name. Then how are you going to justify your almighty,  eternal Nero, who has been, and is still causing numberless tragedies  every day, every hour and every minute? How do you think to support his  misdoings which surpass those of Changez every single moment? I say why  did he create this world - a veritable hell, a place of constant and  bitter unrest? Why did the Almighty create man when he had the power not  to do it? What is the justification for all this ? Do you say to award  the innocent sufferers hereafter and to punish the wrong-doers as well?  Well, well: How far shall you justify a man who may dare to inflict  wounds upon your body to apply a very soft and soothing liniment upon it  afterwards? How far the supporters and organizers of the Gladiator  Institution were justified in throwing men before the half starved  furious lions to be cared for and well looked after if they could  survive and could manage to escape death by the wild beasts? That is why  I ask, 'Why did the conscious supreme being created this world and man  in it? To seek pleasure? Where then is the difference between him and  Nero'?
Call him today. Show him the past history. Make him  study the present situation. Let us see if he dares to say, "All is  well".
From  the dungeons of prisons, from the stores of starvation consuming  millions upon millions of human beings in slums and huts, from the  exploited laborers, patiently or say apathetically watching the  procedure of their blood being sucked by the Capitalist vampires, and  the wastage of human energy that will make a man with the least common  sense shiver with horror, and from the preference of throwing the  surplus of production in oceans rather than to distribute amongst the  needy producers - to the palaces of kings built upon the foundation laid  with human bones.... let him see all this and let him say "All is  well".
_Why and wherefore? That is my question. You are silent._
All  right then, I proceed. Well, you Sikhs, you say all the present  sufferers belong to the class of sinners of the previous births. Good.  You say the present oppressors were saintly people in their previous  births, hence they enjoy power. But let us analyze  how far this argument can really stand.
From  the point of view of the most famous jurists punishment can be  justified only from three or four ends to meet which it is inflicted  upon the wrongdoer. They are retributive, reformative and deterrent. The  retributive theory is now being condemned by all the advanced thinkers.  Deterrent theory is also following the same fate. Reformative theory is  the only one which is essential, and indispensable for human progress.  It aims at returning the offender as a most competent and a peace-loving  citizen to the society. But what is the nature of punishment inflicted  by God upon men even if we suppose them to be offenders. You say he  sends them to be born as a cow, a cat, a tree, a herb or a best. You  enumerate these punishments to be 84 lakhs. I ask you what is its  reformative effect upon man? How many men have met you who say that they  were born as a donkey in previous birth for having committed any sin?  None.  Moreover do you know that the greatest sin in this world is  to be poor. Poverty is a sin, it is a punishment.
I  ask you how far would you appreciate a criminologist, a jurist or a  legislator who proposes such measures of punishment which shall  inevitably force man to commit more offences? Had not your God thought  of this or he also had to learn these things by experience, but at the  cost of untold sufferings to be borne by humanity?
I  ask why your omnipotent God, does not stop every man when he is  committing any sin or offence? He can do it quite easily. Why did he not  kill war lords or kill the fury of war in them and thus avoid the  catastrophe hurled down on the head of humanity by the Great War? Why does he not infuse the altruistic  enthusiasm in the hearts of all capitalists to forgo their rights of  personal possessions of means of production and thus redeem the whole  laboring community - nay the whole human society from the bondage  of Capitalism. You want to reason out the practicability of socialist  theory, I leave it for your almighty to enforce it.


----------



## Harry Haller (Jan 3, 2012)

*Re: What is God ? or in which type of God do You Believe?*



HarjinderSinghKandola said:


> If,  as you believe, there is an almighty, omnipresent, omniscient and  omnipotent God-who created the earth or world, please let me know why  did he create it ? This world of woes and miseries, a veritable, eternal  combination of numberless tragedies: Not a single soul being perfectly  satisfied.Untrue, there are many satisfied souls, myself being one of them, Creator created, Creator cannot take responsibility for our actions in how this world has turned out
> Pray,  don't say that it is His Law: If he is bound by any law, he is not  omnipotent. He is another slave like ourselves.It is not his law, it is the opposite, it is down to our law, if we all followed Hukam, the world would be a better place, but we do not, so disease, imbalance of assets, environmental tragedies all take place as a consequence,  Please don't say that it  is his enjoyment.Creator enjoys seeing Creation living in perfect harmony Nero burnt one Rome. He killed a very limited number  of people. He created very few tragedies, all to his perfect enjoyment.  And what is his place in History? By what names do the historians  mention him? All the venomous epithets are showered upon him. Pages are  blackened with invective diatribes condemning Nero, the tyrant, the  heartless, the wicked.
> One  Changezkhan sacrificed a few thousand lives to seek pleasure in it and  we hate the very name. Then how are you going to justify your almighty,  eternal Nero, who has been, and is still causing numberless tragedies  every day, every hour and every minute? As stated, Creator does not cause these tragedies, they are man or nature made, what Creator does is give us ways and philosophies to handle and deal with these tragedies, Sikhi is not magic, no hocus pocus, no prayers and miracles, it is pragmatic way to live life How do you think to support his  misdoings which surpass those of Changez every single moment? I say why  did he create this world - a veritable hell, a place of constant and  bitter unrest? Why did the Almighty create man when he had the power not  to do it? What is the justification for all this ? Do you say to award  the innocent sufferers hereafter and to punish the wrong-doers as well?This and most of your post is based on an Abrahamic view of God, the God that we believe in and accept does not punish or reward   Well, well: How far shall you justify a man who may dare to inflict  wounds upon your body to apply a very soft and soothing liniment upon it  afterwards? How far the supporters and organizers of the Gladiator  Institution were justified in throwing men before the half starved  furious lions to be cared for and well looked after if they could  survive and could manage to escape death by the wild beasts? That is why  I ask, 'Why did the conscious supreme being created this world and man  in it? To seek pleasure? Where then is the difference between him and  Nero'?Creator created so that we all learn to live in consonance with each other and rest of Creation, as Sikhs, We are here to assist in the sharing of love and to learn the ability to see Creator in everything, to find peace, to live life by Hukam, and through that to find more peace and happiness than can be obtained through the senses, to have a connection
> Call him today. Show him the past history. Make him  study the present situation. Let us see if he dares to say, "All is  well". All is not well, but do not blame Creator, there is nature, our own stupidity, natural disasters, Creator teaches us how to straddle all these and live a good life as defined by Creator
> ...



mundahug


----------



## HarjinderSinghKandola (Jan 3, 2012)

*Re: What is God ? or in which type of God do You Believe?*

If,  as you believe,  there is an almighty, omnipresent, omniscient and  omnipotent God-who  created the earth or world, please let me know why  did he create it ?  This world of woes and miseries, a veritable, eternal  combination of  numberless tragedies: Not a single soul being perfectly  satisfied.Untrue,  there are many satisfied souls, myself being one of them, Creator  created, Creator cannot take responsibility for our actions in how this  world has turned out. Why can't God take responsibility for how this world has turned out. Parents are responsible for the well-being of their child. Parents duty is not just to give birth to a child but they bother to give him good education and all other things which they need, and take care of their actions and do as much as they can even if child do misdeeds. So if God created this world and he treat everybody as his child, then he should take the responsibility  for how this world has turned out.
Pray,  don't say that it is His Law: If he is bound by any law, he is not  omnipotent. He is another slave like ourselves.It  is not his law, it is the opposite, it is down to our law, if we all  followed Hukam, the world would be a better place, but we do not, so  disease, imbalance of assets, environmental tragedies all take place as a  consequence, well most of these environmental tragedies, disease, imbalance of assets takes place to those people who followed his Hukam, but those who do not obey his Hukam, are in better situation than formers.   Please don't say that it  is his enjoyment.Creator enjoys seeing Creation living in perfect harmony, O a picture of present world I present to you is perfect harmony for you and creator is enjoying seeing all this. Then how merciless he is. Nero  burnt one Rome. He killed a very limited number  of people. He created  very few tragedies, all to his perfect enjoyment.  And what is his place  in History? By what names do the historians  mention him? All the  venomous epithets are showered upon him. Pages are  blackened with  invective diatribes condemning Nero, the tyrant, the  heartless, the  wicked.
One   Changezkhan sacrificed a few thousand lives to seek pleasure in it and   we hate the very name. Then how are you going to justify your  almighty,  eternal Nero, who has been, and is still causing numberless  tragedies  every day, every hour and every minute? As  stated, Creator does not cause these tragedies, they are man or nature  made, what Creator does is give us ways and philosophies to handle and  deal with these tragedies, Sikhi is not magic, no hocus pocus, no  prayers and miracles, it is pragmatic way to live life. ha, he gave us ways and philosophies to handle and deal with these tragedies, why don't he just stop all these tragedies himself when he is so powerful to create this whole world. How do you  think to support his  misdoings which surpass those of Changez every  single moment? I say why  did he create this world - a veritable hell, a  place of constant and  bitter unrest? Why did the Almighty create man  when he had the power not  to do it? What is the justification for all  this ? Do you say to award  the innocent sufferers hereafter and to  punish the wrong-doers as well?This and most of your post is based on an Abrahamic view of God, the God that we believe in and accept does not punish or reward Well It is written in Gurbani, that those who do misdeeds will get punishment for this as As you sow so shall you reap. I   ask why your omnipotent God, does not stop every man when he is   committing any sin or offence? He can do it quite easily. Why did he not   kill war lords or kill the fury of war in them and thus avoid the   catastrophe hurled down on the head of humanity by the Great War? Why  does he not infuse the altruistic  enthusiasm in the hearts of all  capitalists to forgo their rights of  personal possessions of means of  production and thus redeem the whole  laboring community - nay the whole  human society from the bondage  of Capitalism. You want to reason out  the practicability of socialist  theory, I leave it for your almighty to  enforce it. It is called free will,  Creator does not interfere with Creation, if I get drunk and decide to  drive home, and see a tree come out of the fuzzy haze, and I supposed to  pray and hope God changes the law of physics and somehow makes the tree  vanish? or make people come back to life again? or cure HIV? or make  herpes go away? no, Creation moves on, we are all here to validate and  check each other, do not blame Hitler on Creator, blame the many people  that followed him, if we are to think and action, we must take  responsibility for such, to the end. Creator has given us knowledge and  information, embrace this, and despite what is happening around you, you  will be happy and content and following Hukam, and maybe together we  can make the world a better place instead of sitting on our behinds  chanting for Creator to put OUR mess right. Well I agree with you that what ever wrong deeds we have done, we get punishment for that. But what about those innocent people who never did any such misdeeds and born in a poor family and due to their poverty they could not get education, and live in misery?


----------



## Harry Haller (Jan 3, 2012)

*Re: What is God ? or in which type of God do You Believe?*

Harjinderji, 

Why can't God take responsibility for how this world has turned out. Parents are responsible for the well-being of their child. Parents duty is not just to give birth to a child but they bother to give him good education and all other things which they need, and take care of their actions and do as much as they can even if child do misdeeds. So if God created this world and he treat everybody as his child, then he should take the responsibility for how this world has turned out.

Why should God take responsibility? Parents are responsible only for educating and showing their children the correct way, and God has done that by giving us the SGGS. My parents did everything they could to bring me up as a good Sikh boy, they could have done no more, yet I ignored their advice and education and followed my own way, much to my detriment (bankruptcy/quad bypass/etc etc etc), now according to your logic this is their fault, but it was me sitting at casino tables, it was me stuffing every narcotic down my throat, so it is me that has to deal with the consequences, although my parents have been hugely supportive, it is only as they are so gracious they are able to keep helping despite warning me away from certain lifestyle choices. what my parents have finally done is help me by supporting me as I battle the demons I myself have created, so it is with Creator, Creator tells us what is good and what is bad, it is our choice, but even when we fall, Creator is there to help us get back on our feet again

well most of these environmental tragedies, disease, imbalance of assets takes place to those people who followed his Hukam, but those who do not obey his Hukam, are in better situation than formers

Following Hukam is no guarantee that bad things will not happen, bad things happen for a variety of reasons, following Hukam IS a guarantee that no matter what comes your way, you will be able to deal with it, you seem to think Creator has an interest in the day to day goings ons in our world, Creator has given us all tools to make our own bed, Creator does not take responsibility for our actions or consequences

O a picture of present world I present to you is perfect harmony for you and creator is enjoying seeing all this. Then how merciless he is

This is not perfect harmony, Creator is not enjoying seeing all this, Creator has given full responsibility for our environment to us. Creator would enjoy seeing all living beings living in consonance and harmony. 

ha, he gave us ways and philosophies to handle and deal with these tragedies, why don't he just stop all these tragedies himself when he is so powerful to create this whole world.

Where do you draw the line, I knew gambling was bad, but I carried out regardless, are you suggesting once I had lost all my money, Creator should magic some up, as it is in the power of Creator? I knew narcotics were bad, are you suggesting Creator should magically unblock the 4 arteries that became fully blocked? Everything we do has consequences, and we must deal with these consequences without whining to Creator. The time to converse with Creator is before the action, not before the consequences begin.

Well It is written in Gurbani, that those who do misdeeds will get punishment for this as As you sow so shall you reap

It is written that there are consequences for all actions throug Creation, kick a dog, it will bite you, drive fast in the rain, you may crash, there are no misdeeds or sins, everything has a good consequence or a bad consequence, it is certainly not Creator that is in charge of this, Creator leaves it to ourselves to manage our own business, judgement comes from Creation

Well I agree with you that what ever wrong deeds we have done, we get punishment for that. But what about those innocent people who never did any such misdeeds and born in a poor family and due to their poverty they could not get education, and live in misery?

I know many people from poor familes who have done fine, in Sikhism, enlightenment is open to anyone from any race/sex/colour/social standing, being poor does not stop anyone from being a good Sikh, we can all do different things with the same hand, some will lose, some will win, some will end up angry, some will end up full of love, there is no divine punishment, no stern looks, no pats on backs, We answer the the Creator that resides in our head, hell is guilt and fear, heaven is peace and love, right now, right here


----------



## BaljinderS (Jan 3, 2012)

First of All,  Welcome to SPN Chinu veere! welcomekaur

The word "God" automatically makes you think of Akaal Purkh in Western terms which suggests God as External entity.  I think that is what you are implying when you say "Type of God".  God is omnipresent, we are all part of "God".

Sikhism is about realising your true self so that your can merge back into Akaal Purkh.  Sikhism gives you the tools and provides a pathway for this.

If you really want to understand God then I guess you need the understand the qualities of God.  Sikhism suggest many practical ways of realising God, one very important way is through congregation (Sangat) with holy folks.

Please let me know what you think...hopefully what I said makes sense :happysingh:


----------



## Taranjeet singh (Jan 3, 2012)

1.God is one who takes care of us
2. I believe in God who will never send me back here again and keep me out there.


----------



## Harry Haller (Jan 3, 2012)

Taranjeet singh said:


> 1.God is one who takes care of us
> 2. I believe in God who will never send me back here again and keep me out there.



Taranjeetji, 

I respectfully disagree, I would say God gives us the tools to take care of ourselves, and here is all we have


----------



## Taranjeet singh (Jan 3, 2012)

harry haller said:


> Taranjeetji,
> 
> I respectfully disagree, I would say God gives us the tools to take care of ourselves, and here is all we have



I respectfully respect the reasons of your reasonable reasoning.


----------



## HarjinderSinghKandola (Jan 4, 2012)

@Harry Haller: you said sikhism does not believe in reincarnation and this is the only life we have and only chance to realize GOD. well then what does these words of Gurbani meant:   Nanak Purab likhe ka likhiya payiae


----------



## Harry Haller (Jan 4, 2012)

Harjinderji, 

if you could possibly quote the whole shabad, I will be more than happy to offer my interpretation


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Jan 4, 2012)

1 '_There is only one God_'
2 He does not Self harm.


----------



## Harry Haller (Jan 5, 2012)

Scarlet Pimpernel said:


> 1 '_There is only one God_'
> 2 He does not Self harm.



There is only one God
He does not interfere in the consequences of riding with the thieves


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Jan 5, 2012)

> 1 '_There is only one God_'


 
Rule number states that there is no one else that exists.Thieves are just shadows in the vapour you call life.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Jan 5, 2012)

Veers Taranjeet Singh, Harry Haller and SP jis, some comments in this dialog.  Abbreviation TS =  Taranjeet Singh ji and HH= Harry Haller ji.





harry haller said:


> Taranjeetji,
> 
> Quote:
> <table border="0" cellpadding="1" cellspacing="0" width=""> <tbody><tr> <td class="alt2" style="border:1px inset">                      Originally Posted by *Taranjeet singh*
> ...



<!--[if !mso]> <style> v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);} .shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);} </style> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>  <w:WordDocument>   <w:View>Normal</w:View>   <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>   <wunctuationKerning/>   <w:ValidateAgainstSchemas/>   <w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>false</w:SaveIfXMLInvalid>   <w:IgnoreMixedContent>false</w:IgnoreMixedContent>   <w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>false</w:AlwaysShowPlaceholderText>   <w:Compatibility>    <w:BreakWrappedTables/>    <w:SnapToGridInCell/>    <w:WrapTextWithPunct/>    <w:UseAsianBreakRules/>    <wontGrowAutofit/>    <w:UseFELayout/>   </w:Compatibility>   <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>  </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>  <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156">  </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if !mso]><object  classid="clsid:38481807-CA0E-42D2-BF39-B33AF135CC4D" id=ieooui></object> <style> st1\:*{behavior:url(#ieooui) } </style> <![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style>  /* Style Definitions */  table.MsoNormalTable     {mso-style-name:"Table Normal";     mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;     mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;     mso-style-noshow:yes;     mso-style-parent:"";     mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;     mso-para-margin:0in;     mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;     mso-pagination:widow-orphan;     font-size:10.0pt;     font-family:"Times New Roman";     mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";     mso-ansi-language:#0400;     mso-fareast-language:#0400;     mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->  *Taranjeet Singh ji*




*Harry Haller ji*



*TS_1.*  God is one who takes care of us.
_We are all part of one creation.  We take care of self, others and others take care of us._

*TS_2.*  I believe in God who will never send me back here again and keep me out there. 
_A body is bunch of chemicals embedded with life.  You will return to chemicals that one takes from around and continuously takes and return.  There is no physical coming back._

_Due to life you live through others and others live through you.  This has a very long and undefined time span lasting unknown times way past our deaths through chemically linked like siblings, children and virtually linked that you ever come across knowingly or unknowingly.  This is not re-incarnation but the concept of life past death and during living._

*HH_1.*  I respectfully disagree, 
_I will agree that there is no God or man/woman with grey hair and looking down on us always._

_However Sikhism espouses one creation of one creator.  Creator as a manifestation through creation of course is a system where we help others and they help us knowingly or otherwise.  See also answer to TS_2._

*HH_2.  *I would say God gives us the tools to take care of ourselves, and here is all we have.
_I disagree.  We are not or never alone.  We interact and other things and life does.  We got to recognize that as qualities inherent in creation.  What we can do is undefined but has also limits undefined through our mental abilities.  Saying , “A smile launched a thousand ships”.  Saying, “A butterfly fluttering in Africa could turn out to be a Hurricane in America”._

_Our tools and capabilities allow us to do a lot and some do more and others do less._

  Sorry about disagreeing and agreeing if I am wrong.  :shrug: :shrug:  :shrug:

  Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Searching (Jan 6, 2012)

For me the "Mool Mantra" describes the God I believe in or may be it is that I believe in that sort of a God because Mool Mantra describes Him that way.


----------



## Harry Haller (Jan 6, 2012)

Ambarsariaji, 

Could you expand on 


_I will agree ina God or man/womn with grey hair and looking down on us always._

as I fundamentally disagree with this, mundahug


----------



## Ishna (Jan 6, 2012)

_I will agree ina God or man/womn with grey hair and looking down on us always.

_Oh how much I wish I could just believe in that version of religion - life I think would be so much simpler without all the responsibility put back on me!  Daddy could take care of everything for me and I could beg forgiveness for my mistakes and all will be cheery and I'll be saved and rewarded in Heaven for putting up with crap in this life.

*sigh *

But I'm sure Ambarsaria ji has got his fingers in a knot on the keyboard - his claim is quite out of character!  lol

(no offense if you DO in fact believe in the Grey Haired Man Upstairs Ambarsaria...)


----------



## Harry Haller (Jan 6, 2012)

I think he has been got at, they have bribed him with chollay puri


----------



## Harry Haller (Jan 6, 2012)

Scarlet Pimpernel said:


> Rule number states that there is no one else that exists.Thieves are just shadows in the vapour you call life.



well they seem to have a big pull for shadows........


----------



## Ambarsaria (Jan 6, 2012)

harry haller said:


> Ambarsariaji,
> 
> Could you expand on
> 
> ...


Harry Haller ji I was intoxicated with thoughts and lack of checking for errors.  See if the corrected one reads as to what I wanted to type versus what was typed.  Some invisible force at play.  lol



> _I will agree that there is no God or man/woman with grey hair and looking down on us always._



Sorry about that.

Sat Sri Akal. mundahug


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Jan 6, 2012)

Veer Ji ofcourse he does not have grey hair, he is without worries, so his hair is white-light and easily contained in one strand of his hair is the entire Universe.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Jan 6, 2012)

I meant he/she does not look like the following as one has to know all to visualize and depict,






Good point you make my veer  mundahug

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## lionprinceuk (Jan 9, 2012)

I believe in nirguna, but I prefer God to be consigned to the pages of the Bible! :grinningsingh:


----------



## Harry Haller (Jan 9, 2012)

God can be whatever we want it to be Lionji, just because the Abrahamic religions have hijacked the word for Abrahamic purposes, does not mean God cannot mean Nirguna, otherwise we end up arguing about semantics, which is a huge waste of time


----------



## lionprinceuk (Jan 10, 2012)

It is true, but I have stated the preference of myself and other individuals where nirguna and sarguna do not fit into monotheism, but rather monism and pantheism.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Jan 10, 2012)

Lion_Prince_Jatinder said:


> It is true, but I have stated the preference of myself and other individuals where nirguna and sarguna do not fit into monotheism, but rather monism and pantheism.


Lion_Prince_Jatinder ji thanks for your post.  Can you state it in layman's terms please without using too many -una's and -ism's as Sikhism is not that complicated!

Guddi - Dana Paani Khich Ke Liyanda - Mohd.Rafi      - YouTube

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## lionprinceuk (Jan 12, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Lion_Prince_Jatinder ji thanks for your post.  Can you state it in layman's terms please without using too many -una's and -ism's as Sikhism is not that complicated!
> 
> Guddi - Dana Paani Khich Ke Liyanda - Mohd.Rafi      - YouTube
> 
> Sat Sri Akal.


lol well I could post Wikipedia links but they shall use the term God again. Still, you can have a look. It will talk about Reality and the Universe. 

Really, I think we need to explain nirguna and sarguna, which is something I am not good at explaining lol

To reduce the isms, lets use sikhi instead of sikhism, it shall help haha


----------



## Ambarsaria (Jan 12, 2012)

Lion_Prince_Jatinder thanks for your comments.  Brief response below.


> Really, I think _we need to explain nirguna and sarguna_, which is something I am not good at explaining lol


_Take a stab at explaining.  No one is perfect and it is only through doing such that one really learns and helps others learn.  This is not about scoring points.  I am sure others will chip in and comment if you provide your understanding._



> To reduce the isms, lets use sikhi instead of sikhism, it shall help haha


_Just as you are quite smart based on your -ism usage.  I purposely left it open ended even though I wanted to mention the -ism in Sikhism.  I see that you took the bait.  We stay brothers in learninglolmundahug.

Any comments.

Sat Sri Akal.
_


----------



## lionprinceuk (Jan 27, 2012)

http://ramblingsofasikh.blogspot.com/2012/01/how-far-and-in-what-ways-did-british.html

Ramblings of a Sikh
The greatest wonder is that each individual knows that Death is the ultimate truth and yet believes that he is immortal

TUESDAY, 24 JANUARY 2012

How far and in what ways did British rule in India influence Sikh identity?


The three hundred years of colourful Sikh history had not generated an all-encompassing definition of a Sikh. However, the hundred years succeeding 1849 saw the intentional and incidental impact of British rule on Sikh identity. During that century there was a systematic undermining of Sikh traditions and practices. At the same time a reformatory movement grew in response to colonial influences and internal disorder. The Singh Sabha supplied the definition of a Sikh within three decades.[1]

Prior to the British Raj the Sikh Panth was united in its devotion to the Gurus and Sikhs occupied diverse cultural locations and articulated a multiplicity of identities.[2] One of the main impacts on Sikh identity during this period has its origins in the history and etymology of religion. In the 3rd century, Lactantius, an early Christian author, defined religion according to the Latin term reliagre, as meaning to bind, in this case being bound to God.[3]  This was by far the most significant of all the ancient definitions, as it is this Hellenistic Christian transformation of the term religio that remains highly significant in our attempt to understand the way in which the concept of religion was used to help mould Sikh identity.[4] 

Nonetheless, even if Lactantius’ definition of religion is not appealed to directly, religion becomes a matter of adherence to particular doctrines or beliefs rather than the preservation of ancestral traditions.[5] In essence, as a result of the Singh Sabha reformation movement the focus of Sikh thought was shifted from orthopraxy to orthodoxy.[6] In short, the Singh Sabha movement transformed a spiritual path into a religion. Nonetheless, orthopraxy, the concept of preserving ancestral traditions is best described by Cicero’s definition of the term relegare.[7] Cicero’s definition is the closest Western notion of what pre-colonial Sikhi really was rather than the definition of religio as provided to us by Lactantius.[8]

The meaning and denotation of the term religion tends to follow Lactantius’ etymology, thereby constructing a Christianised model of religion that strongly emphasises theist belief and creates a dualism, a fundamental difference, between the human world and the transcendent world of the divine, something that was not present within Sikh thought prior-1849. For instance, it was the incorrect translation of ik onkar as ‘there is one God,’ by Ernest Trumpp in 1877 that injected the notion of God, in an Abrahamic sense, into Sikh thought which consequently created a paradigm of theist belief and a division between the human world and the transcendent world.[9] 

Furthermore, we must understand that Descartes heavily influences Trumpp’s understanding of ik onkar. Descartes deduced, via analogy, that there was no doubt of God’s existence because the very thought of ‘Godness’ is something that could not be conceived out of a human mind as the concept of God is too perfect. Therefore, the grounding for Cartesian certainty is located within the human mind. Descartes argues from his own identity and then projects this same kind of methodological scepticism towards postulating the existence of a God. Trumpp takes this understanding and uses this to understand the Adi Guru Granth Sahib Ji. As a result Trumpp creates a distance between ‘God’ and the individual.[10] N.G Barrier indicated that Trumpp’s unapologetic dismissal of Guru Nanak Dev Ji had an influential effect on Sikh mentalities. The publication of Trumpp’s text provided a call to the emerging intelligentsia to protect and respond to the attacks from foreign powers.[11] It was this emerging intelligentsia that would provide the driving for for the Singh Sabha movement. This in itself is not the problem; the problem was that the Singh Sabhaists responded to the external pressures to define who they were within the definitions , lexis and terminology that the British had defined rather than deconstructing these notions and re-constructing them upon their own grounds.

On the other hand, a traditional translation of ik onkar would deduce that the term onkar is the experiential unfolding of existence, experienced subjectively and observed objectively in a number of ways. Before the beginning, the Ik, which is representative of absolute reality, was one and non-dual. It desired to manifest itself, through "I am only one - may I become many."[12] This was the primal cause of creation through an unstruck vibration which eventually became sound (struck vibration), and this sound is Om or Ong (pronounced AUM). Through this primal sound vibration existence began to manifest as a continuum, a wave of creation, sustainment and destruction. [13] The suffix "kar"(form), represents this infinite continuum.

Furthermore, ik onkar represents the four states of all manifested creation. These are creation, preservation, destruction and re-birth. This applies to both those which manifests in time, such as thoughts and subjective experience, just as much all that manifests in time and space, including the Universe itself. Onkar also represents the four states of the Consciousness.  The three sounds in Om (A-U-M) represent jagrat, swapna and sushupti. The last state, turiya, is the pure awareness within which all three states are contained.[14]

The miss-translation of the term ik onkar is just one of the fundamental differences between Sikhi and Sikhism. However, another important difference was that Sikhi viewed the Adi Granth, the Dasam Granth and the Sarbloh Granth at par. However, Singh Sabha leadership, in response to the miss-translation of the Adi Granth by Trumpp, was to radically alter this equilibrium.[15] The Dasam Granth, which enshrined the pracitces of Sikhi, such as dheg, chatka and respect toward Chandi Ma, were gradually eased out of everyday Sikh traditions, partly in order to heighten the importance of the Adi Granth. Furthermore by the early 20th century it no longer enjoyed the textual hegemony it once enjoyed. In withdrawing the Dasam Granth from religious circulation and the standardization of the Adi Granth, as a result of the printing press (and Teja Singh Bhasauria), the message being driven home was simple and straightforward: the metaphysical and cultural assumptions of Sikhi as sanctioned by the Dasam Ganth, such as the strong belief in the role of avatars, conceptions of the divine in feminine terms and the consumption of cannabis in order to connect to existence were no longer permissible.[16] Furthermore, it ensured the purge of the heterogeneous nature of Sikhi, and ensured the central role of just the Adi Granth thus paving the road for the Singh Sabha to create life-cycle rituals that were to help define a Sikh within the Singh Sabha mind frame.

This consequently helped to create the Sikh religion known as Sikhism, this is one of the most obvious illustrations of the change of Sikh identity. The creation of Sikhism was part of the trend that took place during the 19th century in the West when western scholars added the suffix, ‘-ism,’ to the names of numerous spiritual orders.[17] As a result of P.J Marshall’s and Romila Thapar’s examination of the production of the category of Hinduism, Oberoi notes that Europeans tended to construct images of Indian religions in the mould of Christianity, stressing that the ‘-isms,’ – Hinduism and Sikhism – were largely the product of the European intellectual frameworks of the late Enlightenment.[18]

In addition, within most Indian languages such as Punjabi, Urdu and Hindi there is no noun for religion as signifying a single uniform and homogenized community of believers.[19] The Sapir-Whorf hypothesis dictates that the structure of language affects the ways in which its speakers conceptualize the world. Therefore we can deduce that the construction and introduction of a religion, in this case Sikhism, into a society that did not posses such a noun created something far from the truth.[20]

At first this simple change of lexis, Sikhi to Sikhism, may be seen as two different names for the same tradition. However, this is not the case for it was Sikh reformers in the 19th and 20th centuries who, for the first time ever, labelled many practices and certain forms of Sikh identity, that were accepted under Sikhi, as unacceptable.[21]

However, to be able to understand what it exactly was that the Singh Sabha edited and reformed we have to look at some of the very first European accounts of the Sikhs and early Sikh art. This is because it is here that we are met with deviations from what is today accepted as the doctrines of the Sikhs, as established by the Singh Sabha. However, we must bear in mind that many European observers of the Sikhs were far more occupied with following the conventions established by Orientalism scholarship in India rather than documenting the behaviour of the practitioners.[22] The accounts provided by European observers were used by the Singh Sabha to endorse their opinion that Sikhi was deviating from what they deemed to be the ideal state of Sikhism.

For example, appendix A is a 19th century cover to a Guru Granth Sahib Ji manuscript, commissioned by the Sraddha family, the direct decedents of Guru Nanak Dev Ji, created by Miha Singh of Kashmir and depicts a twelve-petalled lotus.[23] At the centre of this lotus is Sodhi Bhan Singh worshipping Maha-Kal and Maha-Kali. The Gurus with their wives and children are shown in the ten petals surrounding and the two remain petals house ancestral figures in the Sodhi’s guru-lineage.[24] However, what is interesting to note is not just the depiction of Maha-Kal and Maha-Kali, which are today seen as belonging to Hinduism, but also the tilak that is adorned on the heads of each Guru. This image is completely alien from appendix B, C and D, modern day depictions of the Sikh Gurus, in which the individuals are all shown to be saint like in appearance, eyes closed and certainly not bearing the tilak. The difference in art is just but one way of tracing the impact that the Singh Sabha had on Sikh identity. For art mirrored the practices and accepted norms of the Sikh tradition and as these traditions changed so to did Sikh art.

Furthermore, Lieutenant Colonel James Browne writes in 1788 in his treatise to John Motteux, the chairman of the East India company, about numerous different types of Sikhs, describing degh-drinking, martially orientated Akali-Nihang Sikhs and the more aesthetic Nanakpanthi Sikhs.[25] This is but one of the many accounts that illustrates the heterogeneous nature of the Sikhs. Yet, it was the British fascination of census’s that, to an extent, helped to fuel the Singh Sabha’s fetish with creating a homogenous identity for the Sikhs. For example, during the 1891 census of Punjab some 1,344,862 Sikhs declared themselves to be Hindu.[26] 


Furthermore, in the census report provided by Russel Robert Vane, Sikhi was seen as nothing more than a Hindu sect.[27] It was the pressure exerted by the British and the assimilative forces of Hindu groups such as the Arya Samaj, who extensively campaigned with various means to illustrate that Sikhs were a sub-category of the Hindu faith, that caused the creation of a reformatory movement that helped push toward a homogenous Sikh identity.[28] This battle against assimilative Hindu forces has been immortalised in the words of Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha, a Singh Sabha Sikh scholar, who proclaimed through a vernacular tract that, Ham Hindu Nahin.[29] It was these four words that added to what was essentially the basis of the Singh Sabha movement. 

However, there was another reason for why the Singh Sabha was determined to create a homogenous Sikh identity. This was due to the Hindu connotations within pre-British Raj Sikhi, especially within the Nihang order. Many of the earliest accounts only refer to Akali-Nihangs as Sikhs, as these individuals were the most visible due to, ‘their blue dresses, their high-peaked turbans, the rings of steel, which they wear as the peculiar emblems of their devotion.’[30]  The Nihangs were the oldest and most respected order within the Sikh community. [31] The creation of the Nihangs came hand-in-hand with the construction of the Akal Takht – a durbar that was far larger than any of those that belonged to the Mughal Emperors at the time.[32] The Nihangs also have mythical origins that date back some millienia in the army of Chandikha.[33] Nonetheless, the Nihangs did not receive their distinctive dress until the amrit-sanchar of 1699, when the tenth guru, Guru Gobind Singh Ji, created the Khalsa.[34] Unfortunately, it was the very vanguard of the Khalsa who were most affected by the Singh Sabha. For instance the Champlain of the East India Company, James Coley, notes that, ‘these demonicas posses an awful influence over the people, being regarded as demi-gods, and when any public emergency arises, a conviction of Akalees is held at Umritsar, and whatever they decree is considered to be the voice of heaven and acted upon with universal enthusiasm.’[35]

However, because the Nihangs were the biggest threat to the British Raj, their influence was reduced. For example, it was the Akali-Nihangs who placed the largest threat to the British during the Anglo-Sikh wars. During the First Anglo-Sikh War (1846), at the battle of Sobraon the Nihangs suffered a tremendous defeat. However, they had succeeded in psychologically scaring the British. James Coley comments that, “the Seekhs, they say, fought furiously; and there were numbers of naked Akalees among them, whose presence maddened them the more and who are represented to have looked like fiends.”[36] The surviving Akali-Nihangs were betrayed by the Sikh state of Patiala, in which 32,000 Nihangs were killed. As a result the remaining Nihangs travelled south to find haven in the Deccan and would remain in self-imposed exile for 12 years.[37] It is here, even to this day, that practices of the Sikh tradition still exist. 

It was in response to the Anglo-Sikh wars that certain laws were past in order to lessen the authority of the Nihangs and to weaken their sphere of influence as much as possible. Viceroy Lord Lytton passed laws such as the Indian Arms Act (XI) of 1878 that ensured that no person could carry arms, except under special exemption or by virtue of a license. As a result the Nihangs could not carry arms and of course the British did not allow any Indian possess a weapon unless they had been deemed ‘civilised’.[38]

In addition, as a result of early observers of the Sikhs only ever referring to the Akali-Nihangs as Sikhs, there was a common misunderstanding that the Sikhs were dying out. This view is endorsed by the likes of Jagjit Singh, Avtar Singh and Rajiv A. Kapur who all suggest that after the annexation of Punjab in 1849 Sikhs were in decline and in a state of decadence, confusion and uncertain about their identity.[39] Ernest Trumpp endorsed this opinion and in 1877 wrote that, ‘Sikhism is a waning religion, that will soon belong to history.’[40] Furthermore, Robert Needham Cust, a British colonial administrator, was of the opinion that the remaining Sikh institutions should be pushed towards their ultimate death.[41] In actual fact the census reports from 1855 and 1868 both illustrate that the number of Sikhs was not in decline.[42] However, in both cases and up until the census of 1933, the definition of the category Sikh remained unclear.[43] Moreover, the belief that there was no decline in Sikh numbers was simply a myth created by the loose definition of the Sikhs, as created by the British.[44]

However, by the time of the 1911 census, the Singh Sabha had successfully established a definition of a Sikh as being anyone who maintained the panj kakar and abstained from tobacco.[45] The downfall of this definition was that it automatically regarded vast swathes of the Sikh community as non-Sikhs including – Nanakpanthis, Sewapanthis, Udhasis, and Nirmalas. 

One of the British Raj’s most profound and direct influences upon Sikh identity was undoubtedly as a result of the British Army. As a result of prowess shown by the Sikhs during the Anglo-Sikh wars, the British were convinced that Sikhs were militaristic race.[46] As early as 1846, two Sikh regiments were raised from the annexed trans-Sutlej territories. This was the start of a constant stream of Sikh recruits following the annexation of Punjab. However, it was upon being enlisted that a Sikh recruit was asked to undergo the initiation rite, and it was mandatory for him to maintain the external symbols of the faith. Regiments employed granthis to conduct Sikh ritual observances, even though the Nihangs were traditionally the only individuals allowed to conduct Sikh ceremonies such as amrit, as a result the authority of the Nihangs was lessened further. 


Furthermore, there was a deep conviction within the army hierarchy that the martial prowess of the Sikhs flowed mystically out of their religious observances and beliefs. It was feared that if Sikh traditions were not upheld, the ability of Sikh soldiers to act as a ‘fighting machine’ might rapidly deteriorate. Philistine army commanders enforced an extremely narrow, functional and mechanistic definition of Sikh tradition and concluded that only those who carried the five symbols were deemed genuine Sikhs.[47]However, this illustrates an unmindful approach of the complex nature of the Sikh tradition.

Further British influence upon Sikh identity was made possible through the rapid introduction of railways, roads, the electric telegraph, postage facilities and the printing press. This transformation in communication ensured that the Singh Sabha could through their propaganda, endorse certain practices and oppose others. For instance, an editor of the Singh Sabha’s newspaper, the Khalsa Akbar, asked its readers ‘Will the beloved of the Khalsa Quam [community], the firm followers of the tenth Guru, Gobind Singh Ji, ever accept anyone else as a Guru except the ten Gurus and the Adi Granth? The answer was: Never.’[48] This was but part of the propaganda campaign that has led to the controversial debate around the authenticity of the Dasam Granth.[49] This debate originates from the Dasam Granth’s removal from the Akal Takht in the 1940s by the SGPC, the successors of the Singh Sabha movement.[50] However, historical evidence talks louder than Singh Sabha propaganda, and the Anadpuri Dasam Granth can be shown to have certainly been compiled in the Guru’s court for it contains a colophon of 1695/1696 AD as well as numerous handwritten pages by Guru Gobind Singh Ji.[51]

In addition, the Dasam Granth had since the time of Guru Gobind Singh Ji played a pivotal role within Sikhi. Firstly, certain compositions that are recited during the amrit sanchar are taken directly from the Dasam Granth.[52] In addition, Charles Wilkins, a leading orientalist writer, wrote in 1781 that, ‘there stood also near the altar, on a low desk, a great book of a folio size [Dasam Granth], from which some portions are daily read in their divine service. It was covered with a blue mantle, on which were printed, in silver letters, some select passages of their law.’[53]

In addition, to re-balancing equilibrium that existed between the three main Granths, the Singh Sabha formulated life-cycle rituals, created distinctive symbols, established a religious hierarchy and purged a plurality of traditions and beliefs in order to remove the pluralist paradigm of Sikhi and replaced this with a highly uniform Sikh identity with its own distinctive rituals.[54]

An example of one of the life-cycle rituals that the Singh Sabha formulated is the Anand Karaj Act of 1909. The act legally codified a Sikh ritual, thereby providing Sikh separatism with government recognition. Furthermore, thanks to the new innovations brought to India by the British, such as the telegraph and the printing press, any opposition to this act was simply drowned out by an unending stream of tracts and newspapers that were packed with articles in defence of the Act.[55] Furthermore, it put an end to the old marriage rites that were deemed Hindu by the Singh Sabha, due to the central role of a Brahmin Pandit and a haavan.[56]

Furthermore, Dr G. W. Leitner, a Hungarian Orientalist, remarked how the numerous ascetic orders were key in local education.[57] The Udhasis would teach you meditation, the Nirmalas would teach you aryu-vedic science and the Nihangs would teach you shastar-vidiya. However, this changed for in Punjab the British Raj and the church advanced side by side in order to further Christianity and western education. As a result numerous British run schools, mission stations and church-sponsored schools were created, imparting western education that understood Sikhi to be highly mechanical and utilitarian in manner.[58] As a result, students who came out of these new schools posed a serious threat to the heterogeneous nature of Sikh identity and were some of the first practitioners of Sikhism.

In addition, the Singh Sabha created religious symbols that would differentiate Sikhs from other religions. For instance, the khanda, a modern symbol of the Sikhs, is often nowadays seen on the nishan sahib, a tall flag that is situated alongside any gurdwara, as depicted in appendix F. However, with the removal of the Dasam Granth and the Nihangs, the symbology of Sikhi was also removed and replaced with the khanda - a symbol that did not exist before the 20th century. This is because the trisul, a symbol of Sikhi, similar to the khanda, endorsed by the Nihangs had connotations with Shiv.[59]

However, it was due to the connotations of Hindu thought that were entwined within Sikh orthopraxy by practices such as chatka, dheg and shastar-puja that the Singh Sabha, in a bid to create a homogenous Sikh identity, wished to remove. Therefore, the Singh Sabha replaced the array of weapons, clearly visible in appendix H and I, which were typically depicted on nishan sahibs with the khanda. This is because shastar-puja was deemed Hindu due to the connotations of shastars with Chandi Ma.

It seemed that the Singh Sabha would not rest until any connotations with the Hindu tradition were removed. Moreover, in order to maintain control of Sikh practice the SGPC was created in 1925 under the Sikh Gurdwara Act.[60] This was in order to maintain and control the practices and traditions that took place within the confines of all of the gurdwaras. It simultaneously dispelled the old orders who until the passing of this act found haven in the numerous gurdwaras, either as teachers, priests or builders. The late jathedar of the Buddha Dal, Baba Santa Singh Ji comments that, ‘the S.G.P.C. are enemies of the vanguard of the Sikhs, the Akali-Nihangs. This is because only after making pledges did they get the Act passed. The Act was only passed on the promise that the Sikhs would not rise up against the British.’[61]

In nearing conclusion it must be noted that religion, as a systematized sociological unit claiming unbridled loyalty from its adherents and opposing an amorphous religious imagination, is a relatively recent development in the history of India and for the Sikhs.  The transition process of how Sikhi was replaced with Sikhism was achieved so by a new cultural elite that aggressively usurped the right to represent others within this newly homogenous tradition. Furthermore, it is clear the central role that the British played in constituting the homogenous Sikh identity was in order to create a loyal Sikh solider that would become the bulwark to British authority and loyal citizens of the Raj.[62] 

However, to be able to suggest that the British had a pre-planned strategy would be unjustifiable for whilst the colonial government of India insisted that the administration relinquish its control over Sikh shrines; the provincial administration in Punjab was pressing to retain control over major Sikh shrines and in fact constructed a church tower within the precincts of the Golden Temple, as seen in appendix J, in order to further missionary work.[63]

Overall, it was the new technology, such as the printing press, aggressive policies against any threat posed by certain Sikh orders, such as the anti-Nihang laws, and the conscription of vast swathes of Sikhs into the British Indian Army that set the platform for the Singh Sabha to create a homogenous Sikh identity. A sad result of this was that the rich culture that existed within Sikhi, which was equally at home with ascetics, home owners and warriors was purged into a religion that excluded any order that had connotations with anything that the Singh Sabha determined was not Sikh. In short, the Singh Sabha process created the world religion we see today as Sikhism. 




Appendix A


A 19th centuy cover to a Guru Granth Sahib Ji manuscript containing illustrations of Maha-Kal and Maha-Kali alongside the ten gurus. Nidar Singh Nihang and Parmjit Singh, In the Master’s Presence The Sikhs of Hazoor Sahib Volume 1: History (London: Kashi House, 2008):26

Appendix B


Sobha Singh, http://www.sobhasinghartist.com/pictures/available/large/aa9.jpg. An illustration of Siri Guru Nank Dev Ji



Appendix C


Sobha Singh, http://www.sobhasinghartist.com/pictures/available/large/aa12.jpg. An illustration of Siri Guru Tegh Bhadur Sahib Ji

Appendix D


Raja Ravi Varma, http://www.indianartcollectors.com/iabig_images/XXL_RajaRaviVerma-L-940440172.jpg. An illustration of Siri Guru Nanak Dev Ji.


Appendix E


This lithograph is taken from plate 5 of Emily Eden's 'Portraits of the Princes and People of India'. 1844. http://www.bl.uk/onlinegallery/onlineex/apac/other/019xzz000000043u00005000.html


Appendix F


Photo of the two nishan sahibs, with the modern day khanda on the flag, situated in front of the Akal Takht at Siri Harminder Sahib. taken by John Bradley, 6/17/2004. http://www.johnhbradley.com/photos/061704armitsar/img_5339.jpg.


Appendix G


A trisula. http://www.britishmuseum.org/resear...h_the_collection_database.aspx&currentPage=12


Appendix H


Gurmukhi and Urdu script, A picture of Darbar Sahib in Amritsar. Faiz Press of Bhai Gujjar Singh, collected by J. Lockwood Kipling, ca. 1874, woodblock print, Victoria and Albert Museum.





Appendix H

An illustration of Guru Gobind Singh Ji travelling through Rajasthan en route to the Deccan. The Akali Nihang Singh carries his battle standard that contains a punch dagar, shield and sword rather than the modern day khanda. Nidar Singh Nihang and Parmjit Singh, In the Master’s Presence The Sikhs of Hazoor Sahib Volume 1: History (London: Kashi House, 2008):7


Appendix I




View of the Golden Temple and a partially constructed gothic-style clock tower, c. 1868-70. Albumen print, James Craddock. © Toor Collection


Glossary

Adi Granth – This is short for Adi Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, the foremost Sikh scripture revered as the Eternal Guru.

Akal Takht – Throne of the immortal; the highest seat of temporal power situated in Amritsar directly opposite the Golden Temple. It was once the base of the Akali-Nihangs.

Nihang – The entire Sikh community were militarised to form an army of Nihangs in the late 17th century by Guru Gobind Singh Ji.

Amrit sanchar – The ceremony within which an individual is initiated into the Khalsa.

Anadpuri Dasam Granth – This refers to the Dasam Granth that was located in Anadpur Sahib and is an original copy from the court of Siri Guru Gobind Singh Ji.

Anand Karaj – The wedding ceremony that was originally created by the Nirankaris in the 1880s. It was eventually legitimized by the British authorities in 1909.

Arya Samaj – A Hindu reform movement that was founded in 1875.

Aryu-vedic science – A system of traditional medicine native to India.

Avatars – This refers to the numerous demi-gods and demi-goddesses that are nowadays thought to belong exclusively to the Hindu tradition. However, all Sikh scripture, including

the Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, refer to numerous avatars. 

Baba Santa Singh Ji – The 13th leader of the Nihangs who sadly passed away in 2008 after being poisoned by the Indian government.

Brahmin Pandit – A religious priest of the highest cast of the Hindu tradition

Buddha Dal – This literally translates to veteran army; the informal name given to Guru HarGobind Ji’s Nihang army in honour of Baba Buddha Sahib Ji, a revered Sikh who first trained its warriors.

Chandikha  - The Hindu goddess of war and guardian of righteousness. An incarnation of Shiv Ji’s consort, Parabati.

Chatka – To kill with a single blow; refers to the practice of using a sword to decapitate an animal a offering to the guardian of righteousness, Chandi or Chandika. This tradition is still maintained by the Nihangs.

Dasam Ganth – The compositions of Guru Gobind Singh Ji compiled by Bhai Mani Singh Ji. Although revered by Sikh traditionalists as scripture equal to the Adi Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Sikh revisionists such as the Singh Sabha disdain it. It is placed on par with the Adi Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji in any Nihang encampment.

Degh – The name given to the Nihang’s traditional consecrated drink. It is made by grinding almonds, black pepper, cardammon seeds, cannabis leaves and other ingredients in a mortar and pestle. The juices are extracted and mixed with water or milk to produce shaheedi degh, the martyrs drink. If sugar is added, it is dedicated to Hindu-Sikh martyrs. It unsweetened, it is dedicated to the loyal Muslims who died fighting for the Guru. It is still practiced widely amongst Nihangs.

Durbar – Royal court, in the context of the Guru’s court, it refers to the innermost area of a shrine which worshippers can enter and pay their respects.

Granthis – The raeder of a granth; title given to the individual who recites from the scriptures

Granths - Book

Gurdwara – Guru’s gate; a place of worship, which, at a minimum, houses the Adi Siri Guru
Granth Sahib Ji.

Guru – Darkness into light; a respectful title for a teacher or spiritual guide.

Guru Gobind Singh Ji – The tenth Guru of the Sikhs

Guru Nanak Dev Ji – The first Guru of the Sikhs

Haavan – Ritual fire offering; in early Sikh tradition, such offerings were made of decapitated goats and oxen in dedication to Chandi.

Ham Hindu Nahin – We are not Hindu.

Hinduism – The modern Hindu religion
Ik onkar – – The first symbol of the Adi Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji

Jathedar - leader

Khalsa – Pure; this term was used to signifiy the Sikhs loyal to the Guru.

Khalsa Akbar – One of the many newspapers that were created by the Singh Sabha

Khanda – This often refers to the modern symbol of the Sikhs. However, it can also refer to a double edged sword

Maha-Kal – Great Death; the fiercest form of Shiva and the chief inspiration of marital technique and adoration of Nihangs

Maha-Kali – The consort of Maha-Kal

Nanakpanthi – Followers of Guru Nanak Dev Ji within the old Sikh tradition

Nirmalas – They were specialist scholars and educationalists among the Sikh community and were, therefore, typically well versed in several languages, religious texts and philosophies.

Nishan sahib – A battle standard that marks the presence of the Sikhs

Panj kakar – The 5 symbols that are always on the person of a Khalsa Sikh. They are Kesh (unshorn hair), Kara (steel bracelet), Kirpan (sword), Kachera (breeches) and Kanga (comb).

Panth – Designates a group following particular teachers or doctrines

Relegare – The concept of preserving ancestral traditions as defined by Cicero.

Reliagre – Meaning to bind, typically to bind to God.

Religio – The Latin term for what today is known as religion

Sarbloh Granth – The work of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. It was removed by the Singh Sabha movement but still to this day the Nihang’s place it beside the Adi Granth and Dasam Granth

Sewapanthis – They are known for their close ties with Muslim communities and indiscriminate supply of free medicine and medical care. They were established by Bhai
Kanheya Lal in 1704

SGPC – The Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee, it was established by the British through the passing of the Sikh Gurdwara Act 1925.

Shastar-puja – The worship of weapons

Shastar-vidiya – The science of weapons

Shiv – The destructive aspect of the Formless Supreme Being; the primordial Indian deity and archetypal shaman who later became revered by the Nihangs as the primordial grandmaster of martial arts. In the Sarbloh Granth, Guru Gobind Singh Ji refers to the form of his Khalsa as being in the form of Shiv.

Sikh – Literally translates to ‘learner.’ However, it also designates the followers of the Gurus.

Sikh Panth – A group of Sikhs following a particular path

Sikhi – This is in reference to the older Sikh tradition that existed in its entirety prior to the Singh Sabha and the British Raj.

Sikhism – This is the modern religion that advocates the belief in One God and poses a homogenous Sikh identity.

Singh Sabha – The reformist movement of the 19th century.

Sodhi Bhan Singh – A descendent of Siri Guru Nanak Dev Ji

Tilak – A mark worn on the forehead that signifies the third eye. This is often seen as a sign of enlightenment.

Trisul – The three pronged trident of Shiv Ji.

Udhasis – Followers of the Guru Nanak Dev Ji’s son, Baba Siri Chand. These were the detached ascetics.



Bibliography 

Primary Sources in English

Coley, James. The Sutlej Campaign of 1845-6. London: Smith Elder and Co., 1856.

Goswami, Amit. Qunatum Physics & Consciousness 1 of 3, November 21, 2011, Amit Goswami, Quantum Physics & Consciousness 1 of 3      - YouTube

M’Gregor, W.L. The History of the Sikhs. 1846. Reprint, Dehli: Rupa Publications India Pvt. Ltd., 2007.

Singh, Parmjit and Amandeep Singh Madra. Sicques, Tigers of Thieves, Eyewitness accounts of the Sikhs, 1606-1809 New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2004.

Singh, Vir. Satwant Kaur. Patiala, Punjab University: 1900.

Siri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji. http://www.sridasam.org

Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji. http://www.searchgurbani.com

The Golden Temple Exhibition, Brunei Gallery SOAS, 14 July 2011 – 25 September 2011. http://www.goldentemple1588.com

The Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925. http://www.punjablaws.gov.pk/laws/33.html

Trump, Ernest. The Adi Granth or The Holy Scriptures of the Sikhs. 1877. Reprint, Dehli:
Munishiram Manoharlal Publishers, 2010.

Vane, Russell Robert. The Tribes and Castes of the Central Provinces of India. London: Macmillan, 1916.

Primary Sources in Punjabi

Bhasaur, Teja Singh. Panch Khalsa Rahit Nama. Bhasaur: Pnach Khalsa Divan, 1907.

Khalsa Akbar, 9 April 1887 and 18 September 1886.

Nabha, Khan Singh. Ham Hindu Nahin. Amritsar: Shri Guru Singh Sabha Shatabdi Committee, 1898.

Singh Ji, Baba Santa. Pracheen Panth Prakash Steek. (Amritsar: Singh Bros, 2004)


Secondary Suorces

Alexander, Michael and Sushila Anand. Queen Victoria’s Maharajah, Duleep Singh 1838-93. London: George Weidenfeld and Nicolson Limited, 1980.

Ballantyne, Tony. Between Colonialism and Diaspora, Sikh Cultural Formations in An Imperial World. London: Duke University Press, 2006.

Cunningham, J.D. History of the Sikhs. 1849. Reprint, Dehli: D.K. Publishers, 1996.

Grewal, J.S. From Guru Nanak to Maharaj Ranjit Singh, Essays in Sikh History. Amritsar: Guru Nanak University Press, 1972.

Grewal, J.S. Historical Perspectives on Sikh Identity. Patiala: Punjabi University Press, 1997.

James, Lawrence. Raj, The Making of British India. London: Time Warner Books UK, 2003.

Kapur, Rajiv A. Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith. London: Harper Collins Publishers, 1986.

Kerr, J. British Relationships with the Golden Temple, The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 21, (1984): 139-51

King, Richard. Orientalism and Religion, Postcolonial Theory, India and the Mystic East. London: Routledge, 2008.

McLeod, W.H. Essays in Sikh History, Tradition and Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.

McLeod, W.H. Prem Sumarag. The Testimony of a Sanatan Sikh. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2006.

Oberoi, Harjot. The Construction of Religious Boundaries. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994.

Penner, Peter. Robert Needham Cust, A Personal Biography. New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1987.

Rand, Gavin. Martial Races and Imperial Subjects: Violence and Governance in Colonial India 1857-1914. London: Routledge, 2006.

Richard Fox, Lions of the Punjab. California, University of California Press, 1985.

Shackle, Christopher. Sikh Religion, Culture and Ethnicity. Edited by Gurharpal Singh and Arvind-Pal Mandair. Surrey: Curzon Press, 2001.

Singh, Avatar. The Singh Sabha Movement in The Origin and Development of Religion, ed. G.S. Talib. Patialia: Punjab University Press, 1975.

Singh, Ganda. The Singh Sabha and Other Socio-Religious Movement in the Punjab. Patiala: Yesman Printers, 1997.

Singh, Jagjit. Singh Sabh Lahir (Ludhiana: Lahore Book Shop,1974)

Singh, K and G.S. Mann. Siri Dasam Granth Sahib, Questions and Answers. London: Archimedes Press, 2011.

Singh, Kushwant. A History of the Sikhs, Volume II: 1839-2004. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004. 

Smith, Wilfred Cantwell. The Meaning and End of Religion. New York: Macmillan Press, 1963.

Spair, Edward. The Status of Linguistics as a Science. Linguistic Society of American, 5 (1929): 207-214

Tosh, John. The Pursuit of History. 5th ed. Harlow: Pearson Education Limited, 2010.

[1] There were 115 Singh Sabhas by 1900. These local institutions helped pressure standardization of practice as now each Singh Sabha could keep in contact via means of telegraph or printing press. However, when referring to the Singh Sabha it is in reference to the Amritsar Singh Sabha that was established in 1873. Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994):45
[2] Tony Ballantyne, Between Colonialism and Diaspora, Sikh Cultural Formations in an Imperial World (London: Duke University Press, 2006):33
[3] Henry S. Nash, The Nature and Definition of Religion, The Harvard Theological Review, 6 (1913): 7
[4] Richard King, Orientalism and Religion: Post-Colonial Theory, India and the Mystic East (New York: Routledge, 1999): 37
[5] Richard King, Orientalism and Religion: Post-Colonial Theory, India and the Mystic East (New York: Routledge, 199): 36
[6] Ibid., 36
[7] Ancient History Encyclopaedia, 2nd September 2009, http://www.ancient.eu.com/religion/
[8] The term Sikhi refers to pre-colonial Sikh tradition where as Sikhism refers to
[9] Ernest Trumpp, The Adi Granth or Holy Scriptures of the Sikhs (1877; reprint, Dehli: Munishiram Manoharlal Publishers, 2010): 1
[10] ‘He who walks in Gods order,’ this clearly illustrates there is a distinction between God and the individual. Ernest Trumpp, The Adi Granth or Holy Scriptures of the Sikhs (1877; reprint, Dehli: Munishiram Manoharlal Publishers, 2010): 1
[11] Tony Ballantyne, Between Colonialism and Diaspora, Sikh Cultural Formations in an Imperial World (London: Duke University Press, 2006):54
[12] Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Page 470, http://www.searchgurbani.com/guru_granth_sahib/ang/470/line/21284
[13] Dr. Amit-Goswami , Ph.D. (2007) Amit Goswami, Qunatum Physics & Consciousness 1 of 3 [Video] Viewed, November 21, 2011, Amit Goswami, Quantum Physics & Consciousness 1 of 3      - YouTube
[14] Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Page 30, Line 13, http://www.srigranth.org/servlet/gurbani.gurbani?Action=Page&Param=30&english=t&id=1259#l1259
[15] Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994):319
[16] ibid.,
[17] Wilfred Cantwell Smith, The Meaning and End of Religion (New York: Macmillan, 1963): 60
[18] Tony Ballantyne, Between Colonialism and Diaspora, Sikh Cultural Formations in an Imperial World (London: Duke University Press, 2006):37
[19] Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994): 12
[20] Edward Sapir, The Status of Linguistics as a Science, Linguistic Society of America, 5 (1929): 207
[21] Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994): 32
[22] ibid., 31
[23] Miha Singh, Twelve Petalled Cosmic Lotus, 27, folio originally attached to a manuscript of the Guru Granth Sahib Ji.
[24] Siri Dasam Granth, Page 113-144. Guru Gobind Singh Ji starts from the origins of the Sodhi clan up until the time of the Gurus. Out of the 10 gurus, 7 were from the Sodhi clan and the other three were from the bedi clan.
[25] James Browne, Browne’s Treatise on the Sikhs, 1788, in Sicques, Tigers or Thieves, Eyewitness accounts of the Sikhs, 1606-1809, ed. Amandeep Singh Madra and Parmjit Singh (New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2004): 91
[26] Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994): 11
[27] Russell Robert Vane, The Tribes and Castes of the Central Provinces of India (London: MacMillan, 1916): 193
[28] Historical the term Hindu was first used by the Persians to label anyone who had been conquered by the Persians but were not Muslim.  Wilfred Cantwell Smith, The Meaning and End of Religion (New York: Macmillan, 1963): 64. ‘On the 11th Anniversary of the Arya Samaj held on 25th November, 1888, the late Pandit Guru Dutt, made certain uncalled remarks on Guru Nanak and Guru Govind Singh…’ Jawahir Singh, Arya Samaj-Singh Sabha, in The Singh Sabha and Other Socio-Religious Movements in the Punjab, ed. Ganda Singh (Patiala: Yesman Printers, 1997):92
[29] Kahn Singh Nabha, Ham Hindu Nahin (Amritsar: Shri Guru Singh Sabha Shatabdi Committee, 1973)
[30] Emiliy Eden, Akalees, JPG, http://ogimages.bl.uk/images/019/019XZZ000000043U00005000[SVC1].jpg. See appendix E
[31] When referring to the Sikh community it is not in relation to a homogenous Sikh community but rather the collective name for the numerous Sikh orders which included the Udhasis (identifiable mostly by their dreadlocks and loin cloths), the Nirmala (identifiable by their pink robes), the Seva Panthis (identifiable by their white cloths) and the Nihangs (identifiable by their blue robes, tall turbans and numerous weapons that will be on their person).
[32] Vir Singh, Satwant Kaur (Patiala: Punjab University, 1900):222
[33] Siri Dasam Granth, Page 321.
[34] Emiliy Eden, Akalees, JPG, http://ogimages.bl.uk/images/019/019XZZ000000043U00005000[SVC1].jpg. See appendix E
[35] James Coley, The Sutlej Campaign of 1845-6 (London: Smith Elder and Co., 1856): 105
[36] James Coley, The Sutlej Campaign of 1845-6 (London: Smith Elder and Co., 1856): 68
[37] Exile of the Immortals, Golden Temple Exhibition, 2011, http://goldentemple1588.com/resource/exile-of-the-immortals/ (14 November 2011)
[38] Defanging the Snake, Golden Temple Exhibition, 2011, http://goldentemple1588.com/resource/exile-of-the-immortals/ (21 November 2011)
[39] Jagjit Singh, Singh Sabh Lahir (Ludhiana: Lahore Book Shop,1974): 1-10; Avatar Singh, The Singh Sabha Movement in The Origin and Development of Religion, ed. G.S. Talib (Patialia: Punjab University Press, 1975):85-91; Rajiv A. Kapur, Sikh Separatism: The Politics of Faith (London: Harper Collins Publishers, 1986):27
[40] Ernest Trumpp,  preface to The Adi Granth or Holy Scriptures of the Sikhs (1877; reprint, Dehli: Munishiram Manoharlal Publishers, 2010): VIII
[41] Peter Penner, Robert Needham Cust, A Personal Biography (New York: The Edwin Mellen Press, 1987): 235
[42] Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994): 207
[43] Census of India 1931, Volume XVII Punjab Part I: Report, by Khan Ahmad Hasan Khan, Lahore, 1933, 290, quoted in Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994): 211
[44] J.S. Grewal, Historical Perspectives on Sikh Identity (Patiala: Punjabi University, 1997):36
[45] ibid., 148
[46] Gavin Rand, Martial Races and Imperial Subjects: Violence and Governance in Colonial India 1857-1914 (London: Routledge, 2006): 13
[47] Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994):361
[48] Khalsa Akbar, 9 April 1887, pg. 5
[49] R. Singh, Darshan Singh’s anti-Dasam Granth Phobia, May 23, 2008, http://panthic.org/articles/4115
[50] G.S. Mann and K. Singh, Siri Dasam Granth Sahib, Questions and Answers (London: Archimedes Press, 2011):10
[51] G.S. Mann and K. Singh, Siri Dasam Granth Sahib, Questions and Answers (London: Archimedes Press, 2011):26
[52] The following compositions are still to this day used within the amrit sanchar and are part of the Dasam Granth – Jaap Sahib, Chaupai Sahib and Tva Prasad Svaiye.
[53] Charles Wilkins, Visit to the Takht at Patna, 1781, 294, in Sicques, Tigers and Thieves
[54] ibid., 25
[55] Khalsa Akbar, 18 September 1886, 3-5
[56] Harjot Oberoi, The Construction of Religious Boundaries, Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1994):342
[57] ibid.,130
[58] ibid., 211
[59]http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/search_the_collection_database/search_object_details.aspx?objectid=178943&partid=1&searchText=shiva&fromADBC=ad&toADBC=ad&numpages=10&images=on&orig=%2fresearch%2fsearch_the_collection_database.aspx&currentPage=12. See appendix G
[60] The Sikh Gurdwara Act 1925, 6th December, 2011. http://www.punjablaws.gov.pk/laws/33.html
[61] Nihang Nidar Singh and Parmjit Singh, The Multifarious Faces of Sikhism throughout Sikh History, Sanatan Sikhi, 2009, http://www.sarbloh.info/htmls/article_samparda_sgpc6.html, (14 November 2011)
[62] Richard Fox, Lions of the Punjab (California, University of California Press, 1985):140
[63] J. Kerr, British Relationships with the Golden Temple, The Indian Economic and Social History Review, 21, (1984): 139-51
Posted by A Rambling Sikh at 16:00


----------



## Kamala (Jan 27, 2012)

Kalika Devi is an aspect of god, so are the 330million other Hindu gods/goddesses. I believe that God did not make them as a joke and they need to be taken seriously by people, especially people that are decendants of the same country where she was.


----------



## Harry Haller (Jan 27, 2012)

Rehat Maryada: Section One 

Chapter I - Sikh Defined 

Article I – Definition of Sikh 

Any human being who faithfully believes in: 
• One Immortal Being 
• Ten Gurus, from Guru Nanak Dev to Guru Gobind Singh
• The Guru Granth Sahib
• The utterances and teachings of the ten Gurus 
• The baptism bequeathed by the tenth Guru, and who  does  not owe allegiance to any other religion, is a Sikh


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Jan 27, 2012)

_"_Why,sometimes Ive believed as many as six impossible things before breakfast."
_Through the looking glass by Lewis Carroll_


----------



## Gyani Jarnail Singh (Jan 27, 2012)

Watch This..doenst it sound familiar..............

Satan's Spokeperson: Oprah Winfrey      - YouTube


----------



## Batman (Jan 28, 2012)

25/m/CA

I walked the path of the Buddha essentially my entire life until discovering the teachings of the Gurus; ever since I have adopted a theistic outlook and am incorporating Sikh ways into my life.

My journey is early but I have evolved from Dharam Khand to Gian Khand and hope to continue the progression.


----------



## Admin (Jan 28, 2012)

*Welcome to SPN! welcomemunda
*


----------



## Parma (Feb 26, 2012)

Interesting comments at the bottom of that article, I have twicked it a bit to make it more readable for viewers, nice to hear some comments and views:


1. *Anonymous*Feb 12, 2012 03:01 PMfficeffice" /><?"urn:
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





</b>:;" target=_blank>ReplyDelete
2. <?xml:namespace prefix = v ns = "urn::vml" /><v:shapetype id=_x0000_t75 o:spt="75" oreferrelative="t" filled="f" coordsize="21600,21600" stroked="f" path="m@4@5l@4@11@9@11@9@5xe"><v:stroke joinstyle="miter"></v:stroke><v:formulas><v:f eqn="if lineDrawn pixelLineWidth 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 1 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum 0 0 @1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @2 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @3 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @0 0 1"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @6 1 2"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelWidth"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @8 21600 0"></v:f><v:f eqn="prod @7 21600 pixelHeight"></v:f><v:f eqn="sum @10 21600 0"></v:f></v:formulas><vath o:extrusionok="f" gradientshapeok="t" o:connecttype="rect"></vath><o:lock v:ext="edit" aspectratio="t"></o:lock></v:shapetype><v:shape style="WIDTH: 27pt; HEIGHT: 27pt; VISIBILITY: visible; mso-wrap-style: square" id=Picture_x0020_1 type="#_x0000_t75" o:spid="_x0000_i1026" alt="http://img1.blogblog.com/img/anon36.png"><v:imagedata src="file:///C:\Users\john\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png" o:title="anon36"></v:imagedata></v:shape>
*Anonymous*Feb 13, 2012 02:47 AM
Further evidence of mass hysteria at the time of Maharaja Ranjit Singh's reign is shown in the development of certain Sikh shrines, which were developed by Maharaja Ranjit Singh's raj, such as Hemkunt sahib, Guru Gobind Singh did not personally say this was the exact point or place he sat at and worshipped god, yet it is assumed and signified to be the place that he did, due to hearsay of some authoritarian ramblings of people with limited truth. They go by a depiction. So evidence of more propaganda. I believe in truth the down fall of the Sikh kingdom was Truth, if the kingdom had stayed on truthful principals, which it did to a certain extent, I don’t think it could have fallen but it didn't remain on complete truth and it is that which, ultimately led to the down fall of the kingdom. Before we blame others for what they have done to the Sikh religion maybe we should look at ourselves first.
ReplyDelete
3. <v:shape style="WIDTH: 27pt; HEIGHT: 27pt; VISIBILITY: visible; mso-wrap-style: square" id=Picture_x0020_2 type="#_x0000_t75" o:spid="_x0000_i1025" alt="http://img1.blogblog.com/img/anon36.png"><v:imagedata src="file:///C:\Users\john\AppData\Local\Temp\msohtmlclip1\01\clip_image001.png" o:title="anon36"></v:imagedata></v:shape>
*Anonymous*Feb 15, 2012 11:45 PM
Also the phase "minu Sikh ni piyare minu rehat piyare” seems intriguing as well. Guru Gobind Singh a man who asked his own father to go forth and make himself a martyr for Hindu's. The man had ultimate love for humanity not orders; otherwise he could have ordered one of his followers in his congregations to do it. It seems hard to justify that phase then, that he would go on to say that I have more love for a man that follows orders than a man who follows god. Sounds like an order from a king then a man of god. I believe through history the after Guru Gobind Singh Ji gave the initiation to the 5 beloved they were able to make decisions that reformed a lot of Sikhism. The only thing is since 500 years of Sikhism how much reform has happened since, they reformed the panth to make it work for the era of the time and as such it lasted, it created a kingdom. It should be reformed to reflect the time now. A true Sikh is Khalsa meaning, pure, purity seems hard to categories. Try to categories one of the purist things known to man the taste of water, it is a hard one to describe. Such is the true Sikh only way to describe a full true Sikh would be purity of the mind, body and soul. If you see god in everything you will realise we are all Sikh, the entire world, no one is born learned, we are all born Sikh (from a baby up until you die, all you do is learn). So Sikhism should develop learn, Is that not what Sikh mean’s LEARN? Viewing everyone as a sikh would not be a bad thing, instead of promoting division in the world it promotes people to look at the entire humanity as your brother and sister
<o>:grinningsingh:</o>


----------



## Ambarsaria (Feb 26, 2012)

Parma veer ji in this era of Internet any one can lay turd on elements by creating snippets and misguiding.  There is virtually nothing in the above to do with Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji and that we need to live by as Sikhs.

If the purpose is to enlighten Sikhs to go away from superstitions, practices, etc., I don't see no such message in your post.  It simply is a way to bring Sikhism dis-repute in the name of paintings, buildings, etc., being mis-used by some.  People show love in ways their heart guides them.  It makes no difference if they are common folks or Kings.  Could such in their actions of love have discrepancies?  Yes of course.  So if someone wants to make Maharajah Ranjit Singh look bad, they have a right in free speech but to be truthful such should be so titled.  Same goes for paintings in which case the painter by name should be criticized.  This is not a Khalsa issue.  It is small minds spewing of poison by such writers who are just jealous how Sikhism does not put them on a pedestal for anti-Sikhi wisdom or their supposed superior intellect.  There are a whole bunch of sects and dehras doing so on a pro-active basis.  

For such wise and above board commentators to claim and be based on presumed truthfulness, such should state their affiliation too.  Say Nirankaris, Radhaswami, so called "Sacha Sauda", etc.

More over let Sikhs not kid themselves.  Setting up of sects/factions to destroy Sikhs has been an established practice since 1947 in India by the *permanent cultural majority**’s* (_pcm_) orthodoxy.  In other words Brahmnic Hinduism.

Read the following,



> http://singhgurtej.blogspot.com/
> Friday, January 20, 2012                         * Bharat in Bhasmasur mode*


Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Parma (Feb 26, 2012)

Will it sort off gets rid of certain superstitions and certain hate. Will maybe there is truth to it, how do you dissaprove it? No point in just saying the writer is chating turd. For all every sikh growing up in the world knows, you could be doing the same thing? Where's the proof? The article mentioned in this thread, was about how much the british raj influenced the sikh identity, the comment says look at yourself first. It also gives reasons to rehat maryda which, a lot of people follow, what are they following? Are they following reason or just words on a day? Sikhism is developing it develops everyday would you rather it developed with full facts and truth or just a propaganda machine version which will not suit anyone not even god as god is based on truth. Lies, always die out the truth will always prevail. I am not here on the basis of solidifying the writers comments, just want to get the truth. Whether through dera's or orthadox or whatever you follow if you dont follow the truth, then how will anyone else. Anyway as the comment says the sikh kingdom fell because the truthfulness in sikhism was deteriorated I believe the writer maybe telling the truth on that point. Anything that does not follow the truth will go the same way as history shows, whether that is dera's position or the orthadox position anything the does not follow the truth will die as they always end up going back to the basics, it happened with Islam, Hinduism, sikhism was created, to counteract the madness and it will carry on unless absolute truth is obtained. Only the truth will previal either way only as god is truth. Anyway I will not debate this issue all I wanted to do was bring things to forefront of sikhism. We all have doubts. Sometimes it is just nice to clear things up! mundahugmotherlylove:grinningsingh::grinningsingh::grinningsingh::grinningsingh:


----------



## Archived_member15 (Feb 26, 2012)

*What is God? In which type of God do I believe?* 


A truly thought-provoking question! 

Well, to be honest, my understanding of God is widening in scope with every pasing day. I am 19 years old and so on that account have a lot more spiritual growth ahead of me. 

To begin with, I believe that the Creator is unknowable and inexpressible in his essence. He is pure spirit. No one has ever seen God. None can ever know him as he is in Himself. We will never and can never fully understand God. In this sense God is impersonal, transcendent, above and beyond all conceptions of human thought or imagination. In the very truest sense, God does not really "exist" in the way we do. For from Him came _all things_ in existence, and so he is not Himself a "thing", not a created reality, rather he is "nothing" - that is "no-thing". In this sense there is a distiction between Creator and creature. 

And yet in a different way, God is also - without being paradoxical - knowable. He is closer to us than our own soul. He is our very being, the ground of our being, the First Cause from which springs all created reality. He is known to us through the imprint of his being which lives and moves and breathes in and through all things. He is known to us through ourselves - for our bodies are the Temples within which his Holy Spirit dwells. We are made in his Image, and so he is known to us through other human beings. God is Love and so all who love are born of God and know God. In every perfect act of human love, we see God. He enlightens all men who are in the world, who ever have been in the world and who will ever be. 

In this sense God is not separate from ourselves, and there is no distinction between Him and us. This is what Meister Eckhart understood when he exclaimed: "*The eye with which I see God is the same with which God sees me. My eye and God's eye is one eye, and one sight, and one knowledge, and one love. Your human nature and that of the divine Word are no different.” (Meister Eckhart)*


----------



## Ambarsaria (Feb 26, 2012)

Parma said:


> The article mentioned in this thread, was about how much the british raj  influenced the sikh identity, _the comment says look at yourself first._


Parma ji it is all nice and peachy but the issues of today relate to actions of the Majority to destroy Sikhs in India post 1947.  British did things for self protection, India is doing and has been doing it for destruction of Sikhs._  Huge and fundamental difference.

__The whole strategy post 1947 has been to create maximum self doubt in Sikhs one way or another.  You so eminently display results of such a strategy.  

_Let me know and post one sabad of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji you have cared to understand and post your understanding.  Garbage and trash talk and cut pastes are cheap done with little effort.Have a great day.  Read, understand and share your understanding of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.  You will have a better life and provide better guidance and contribution to Sikhism.

I am not angry I just feel so sad for people like you who so easily get entrapped with supposedly eyes wide open.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Feb 26, 2012)

Vouthon said:


> *What is God? In which type of God do I believe?*
> 
> 
> A truly thought-provoking question!
> ...


Vouthon brother wonderful post.

You may be interested in un-rehe{censored}d evolving dialog and thoughts in the following if you have not already.



> http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sukhmani-sahib/38127-sukhmani-sahib-astpadi-10-sabad-1-a.html
> 
> http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sukhmani-sahib/38132-sukhmani-sahib-astpadi-10-sabad-2-a.html


Regards for your contributions and at times I don't believe your age to be true at 19.  Perhaps you are too shy and transposed the digits as you have wisdom of thought of a 91 year old  lol.  My mom is 95 years old.

Regards and please continue contributing.


----------



## Seeker9 (Feb 26, 2012)

> Kamala said:
> 
> 
> > Kalika Devi is an aspect of god, so are the 330million other Hindu gods/goddesses.
> ...



God did not make them

I have no more belief in them as I do in the deities of other religions (Thor, Odin, Ra, Osiris, Zeus, Poseidon etc)


----------



## Archived_member15 (Feb 26, 2012)

Ambarsaria said:


> Vouthon brother wonderful post.
> 
> You may be interested in nu-rehe{censored}d evolving dialog and thoughts in the following if you have not already.
> 
> ...


 

kaurhug My dear brother Ambarsaria kaurhug 


I want to give you a massive cyber cuddle! kaurhug And it just wouldn't be right if I didn't give you a little peacesignkauras well winkingmunda 

You are such a nice, lovely, wise and warm man. I am very humbled by your words. I really appreciate them, and I am overjoyed that my conbtributions so far to this forum have been so warmly welcomed - when I'm not even a Sikh! That is a true testament to the Sikh faith and to this forum. I have received such a warm welcome! 

I'm going to have a look at the link - I haven't seen it before! 

And golly gosh do you have good genes - _95_! That's a venerable age right enough. God Bless your dear mother! She raised a brilliant son. 

I am reminded of that British Sikh man that was running a race (think it was marathon) at what? - 100 years old! That was the most amazing thing I have ever seen. Young at heart - they don't lie! lol


----------



## Parma (Feb 26, 2012)

EK ONKAR! My beloved is one, yet known by many names, the doer of all deeds i am but a slave long have I been lost, in the sat namm is were I have found my home. EK ONKAR! Is what I learned veer ji. Nothing else do I know I sikh to learn. This statergy has been played for as long as time, as long as life itself. God was always here just the names and the people and religions have always changed. Never god

Sat Siri Akal, dear veer ji!


----------



## Ambarsaria (Feb 27, 2012)

Parma said:


> EK ONKAR! My beloved is one, _yet known by many names _
> 
> _Remember though that if those names have meanings other than what you pretend them to be, this statement is just politics.  For example Siv, Vishnu, Ram, Jesus, etc., are not Ek Oankar.  So that we are on same page and you are not using slight of hand and mind._
> 
> ...


Parma Veer ji, what can I not like or praise for you in the above.  

What happened to the trash you posted if this is what you sincerely are!

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Luckysingh (Feb 27, 2012)

_Ek Onkar is what the complete Guru Granth Sahib is based on,going on to explain_. Sikhism,existence, truth, eternity, infinity, All beyond and what will ever be is all Ek Onkar.

Even before the universe, before the planets, before any man, any creation.
The truth was Ek Onkar.
Before, Now, After..... Will ALWAYS be Ek Onkar.

The answer to infintiy's boundaries can only be Ek Onkar. Infact all answers come from Ek Onkar.


Ek Onkar Satnaam
Lucky Singh


----------



## Parma (Feb 28, 2012)

Why is it trash? If it is the truth!:interestedkudi:


----------



## Ambarsaria (Feb 28, 2012)

Parma said:


> _Why is it trash_? If it is the truth!:interestedkudi:


 
As in the following is trash,

http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-sikhi-sikhism/37386-what-god-type-god-do-you-11.html#post161306


There is no truth in the above.

Sat Sri akal.


----------



## Parma (Feb 28, 2012)

Where is the truth for the above then? Where do you go to view the correct historical information? Where do you get an unbaised view from?


----------



## Ambarsaria (Feb 28, 2012)

Parma said:


> Where is the truth for the above then? Where do you go to view the correct historical information? Where do you get an unbaised view from?


Sorry I have no interest in dialogging based on your three paragraph rant/history of Sikhism covering from Guru ji to past Maharajah Ranjit Singh. When you write something useful I will be happy to continue as I choose and of course as you choose. Sometimes one is too excited someone saying good not realizing that such still believe in other stuff that made you vomit a day before or that makes no sense. Keep serving Khalsa.

Say Sri Akal.


----------



## chazSingh (Mar 14, 2012)

*Re: What is God ? or, In which type of God do you believe?*



Scarlet Pimpernel said:


> Veera No one can give you what they have realised,only one in a million realises and when that one does he keeps quiet about it,because no one else can really understand their realisation.


 
Satnaam Ji,

you are correct that only one in a million 'realise' but many more are now waking up and *climbing the spiritual ladder* which will have its own experiences and realisation at each step.

When such a soul reaches the state of Sach Khand, they will never be able to describe it...but they will help others to attain that same realisation just like the Gurus Did when they were walking amongst us and as they have written in the divine SGGS Ji.

Blessed are the people that cross paths with such an enlightened soul...for it is like bumping into God in the streets 

sa(n)th janah*u* m*i*l bh*aa**ee*h*o* sach*aa* n*aa*m sam*aa*l ||
_Meet with the humble Saints, O Siblings of Destiny, and contemplate the True Name. Siree Raag 49_ 

bin pourree garr kio charro gur har dhhiaan nihaal ||2||
How can I climb up to the Fortress without a ladder? By meditating on the Lord, through the Guru, I am blessed and exalted. ||2||


----------



## chazSingh (Mar 14, 2012)

Chinu said:


> Well.. Myself: Chinu / M / 32, Punjab/Bathinda, Religion: Sikhism,
> Few days before i registered myslelf here, and i think this is big luck for me that am between you all here in a hope that i'll get my religious answers which i was seeking from a very long time.
> 
> So... my first question is:
> ...


 
satnaam Ji,

all your answers Paji are in the SGGS Ji. These forums will complicate what is actually already very clear and simple.

*aa*p*ae* m*o*th*ee* *oo*jal*o* *aa*p*ae* bhagath bas*ee*t(h) ||
_You Yourself are the perfect pearl; You Yourself are the devotee and the priest._

*aa*p*ae* s*aa*gar b*o*h*i*thh*aa* *aa*p*ae* p*aa*r ap*aa*r ||
_You Yourself are the ocean and the boat. You Yourself are this shore, and the one beyond._

th*oo*(n) *aa*p*ae* *aa*p varathadh*aa* sabhan*ee* h*ee* thh*aa**ee* ||
_You Yourself are contained in all places._

th*oo*(n) *aa*p*ae* jal m*ee*n*aa* h*ai* *aa*p*ae* *aa*p*ae* h*ee* *aa*p j*aa*l ||
_You Yourself are the water, You Yourself are the fish, and You Yourself are the net._

th*oo*(n) *aa*p*ae* j*aa*l vath*aa*e*i*dh*aa* *aa*p*ae* v*i*ch s*ae*b*aa*l ||
_You Yourself cast the net, and You Yourself are the bait._

*What does the above gurbani mean?*
It means Waheguru Ji is everything, me, you, the forum, the people that reply to the forum, the air, the water, everything.

If you can contemplate and start to believe this 100% then your spiritual journey will go into the next gear.

*EKongKarr*
It is One – Ek. Is has vibration, sound – Ong – and from sound, from vibration it express itself in form – Kaar.

the unstruck Sound (anhad Shabad) from God created Form. Everything in the universe including us Vibrate. We currently vibrate out of tune to the universe causing our difficulties in life. We are Sailing against the Wind in the ocean...we need to learn to turn the Sails and let the Wind (shabad current, naam, flow of God) drive us along...

*So how do i Find God....Or how to I realise God?*

bin pourree garr kio charro gur har dhhiaan nihaal ||2||
How can I climb up to the Fortress without a ladder? *By meditating on the Lord, through the Guru, I am blessed and exalted.* ||2||

ghar h*o*dh*aa* p*u*rakh n pashh*aa*n*i**aa* abh*i*m*aa*n m*u*t(h)*ae* aha(n)k*aa*r ||
_The *Primal Being* is within their *own home*, but they do not recognize Him. They are plundered by their egotistical pride and arrogance._

your *own home *is inside your body. So start to understand yourself...analyze your behaviour daily...how much of what you do is dictated by Anger, Greed, desire, attachment and Ego.

you will start to understand how much control Maya has over you, and what you will need to overcome in-order to look within and realise that you are literally part of God...God is the Ocean...your are a Drop of water from the ocean...the ocean is Vast and so powerful, but you are both water particles...the same thing.

Simran is your Key to finding out who your are...it will fight your 5 Thieves (Ego, attachment, desire, anger, greed). They will fight back in your daily lives...but stand firm, keep your head up...keep doing your Simran.

Do your Daily Seva, at work, with your family, friends...understand that they are also a part of god...other water particles...serve them with Love like you are actually serving god...because you really are literally serving god.

Start now..do not waste another breath...do your Simran, ask questions to yourself, ask god questions, look within...he's right there...you just need to find him through the Fog of your Ego.

God bless us all.


----------

