# An Important Question For Your Views



## Pablo (Aug 21, 2011)

I am an agnostic who enoys life, is very comfortable with his surroundings and inner being, is not spiritual, drinks, smokes, looks at other women without guilt ( sometimes points out the nicer ones to the wife!) and generally indulges in whatever makes me (and my wife happy). I have no guilt, no urges that are left undone and am happy with the fact that we evolved from apes.

I have a few things that arouse my curiosity (a) why are mangoes so nice tasting (b) how was the earth placed in such a way so that the sun isnt so near that we burn to death and not so far that we all freeze and (c) what was there before the Big Bang? These queries, however, get a few moments of my attention now and again when i am feeling philosophical . These are not the questions i am asking though. 

My question, and please i would prefer answers without endless diatribe and MORE IMPORTANTLY without self important and wise sounding statements and one liners ....

Some posts on this website have made reference to faith and the need to have a faith in a religion or God ( i capitalise God for respect to yourselves) to guide ones self on what is right or wrong... or what to eat or what not to eat...or who to marry and who not to marry.

The question for you that also raises my curiosity is why do i not need to have a need for such a faith?


----------



## Annie (Aug 21, 2011)

> why do i not need to have a need for such a faith?


Only you can answer that for yourself. Different people believe different things and have different needs. Most if not all of us are just trying to make sense of this universe with the limited information we have. I see your point though about religion telling you what to eat and who to marry. Some religions and religious people go too far.

There's something I am curious about though.  Why do you feel the need to come to a Sikh forum and tell us about how fine you feel about NOT being a Sikh? Maybe you're searching for something?


----------



## Pablo (Aug 21, 2011)

Annie, 
Yes it was rather smart ! You ask a very petinent question.. I was raised a Sikh and had a few spare moments :sippingcoffeemunda: so I thought I'd raise a question on this forum.

My posting shouldnt be taken as a vehicle to promote how "cool" I am for my particular way of life. (I appreciate that others may find the life I lead as far from "cool"!) The information given was just a background for anyone interested.

I am just curious as to any thoughts on the question at hand.


----------



## Ishna (Aug 21, 2011)

> why do i not need to have a need for such a faith?



I had to read your question a couple of times due to sentence structure.  I've gathered you're asking why you personally don't feel the need to have faith in something?  If I'm wrong please restate your question.

My response to my interpretation of our question would be "because that's just the way you are".  There is spectacular variation in creation, and it keeps on keeping on, to borrow Paul Simon's lyrics "spinning in infinity".

And you're a part of that creation.  And you've discovered the human's primitive urges for comfort, excitement, women, and everything else that makes you a happy monkey (I support that theory too!).  And that's fine, however I don't think it leads to any particular evolution.

Please excuse the analogy as I mean no disrespect but I'm short on time:  it's easier to paddle in the kiddie pool than learn to swim in the ocean.

I don't see Sikhi to be as much of a faith-based religion as other religions are.  Sikhi to me is more of an acceptance and acknowledgement of reality.  I don't need to have faith that there is a man in heaven watching my every move to reward or punish me after death.  That would indeed require a lot of faith on my part.  It is easier for me to look at the wonders of creation, appreciate and be in awe of them for what they are, and then be in even more awe thinking the creative force which moves to create the wonders of the world also moves to create wonders so much further away from earth that I can't even imagine, and has been doing it since before the big bang, and will be doing it far after the universe has collapsed in on itself, because -what else could there be?!-.

And I can't help but offer some thoughts on your other questions you weren't actually asking us:

(a) why are mangoes so nice tasting  Just because they are.  And I hate mangoes, go figure!
(b) how was the earth placed in such a way so that the sun isnt so near that we burn to death and not so far that we all freeze and  No idea, but lucky for us?  I suppose the Sikh answer might be "the creative force wanted to create life and so by the power of physics placed the earth right here".
(c) what was there before the Big Bang?  I was watching a show on dark matter last night and asked myself the question:  what did the big bang bang into?  Doesn't an environment already need to exist for something to expand into?  And that's where the awe and inspiration of some creative force come from, from my perspective.  There will always be the "what came before that" question.

Gurfatehji
Ishna


----------



## Annie (Aug 22, 2011)

Pablo ji,

I was raised Christian but left that faith when I was a teenager. I find more truth in other religions, but also a major part of why I want nothing to do with Christianity is that I don't like the attitudes of many people who follow it, or how they have warped the religion to fit their agendas. I wonder, did you feel that way before you left Sikhi?


----------



## Lee (Aug 22, 2011)

Pablo ji,

Of course only you can really ever hope to answer question regarding your Self.

As as Sikh however I am bound to answer in this way.

Gurur ji teaches us that all is Gods will, perhaps then you are simply not yet meant to search for God?

Or perhaps your karma dictates that you should at this time question your lack of faith?

I don't know, but I wish you happy hunting.


----------



## Harry Haller (Aug 22, 2011)

Pablo said:


> I am an agnostic who enoys life, is very comfortable with his surroundings and inner being, is not spiritual, drinks, smokes, looks at other women without guilt ( sometimes points out the nicer ones to the wife!) and generally indulges in whatever makes me (and my wife happy). I have no guilt, no urges that are left undone and am happy with the fact that we evolved from apes.
> 
> I have a few things that arouse my curiosity (a) why are mangoes so nice tasting (b) how was the earth placed in such a way so that the sun isnt so near that we burn to death and not so far that we all freeze and (c) what was there before the Big Bang? These queries, however, get a few moments of my attention now and again when i am feeling philosophical . These are not the questions i am asking though.
> 
> ...


 
Pabloji, 

Firstly welcome to SPN!

I read your post with interest as you sound like me 15 years ago. You sound like a very happy and settled individual,and you have every right to ask yourself, and indeed anyone else, why on earth do you need a restriction on your activities. Well, you don't!. 

Having said that, you mention you look at other women without guilt,sometimes pointing the nicer ones out to your wife, to me this statement speaks volumes, I do not look at other women, not because I feel guilty, as guilt as a terrible thing, but for the pure reason I have no wish to, I am not saying I have conquered lust, but everything starts with a seed, and I see no point in planting seeds that will only cause me problems. The fact that you point out the nicer ones to your wife, intimates to me, that she clearly loves you very much, and is willing to accept you fully, and be secure in your love for her, regardless who you look at. Your wife is clearly a remarkable woman, and she clearly values your happiness and outlook on life. I would ask the question, would you be as happy and contented if it were not for the understanding of your wife?
If you have no urges left undone, again, I commend your wife for being completely in tune with you to the point where you are happy and content. 

Sikhism does not really dictate who you marry or what you eat, you can eat what you want, and marry who you want, you are thinking more in terms of culture than religion. 

As you have stated you are a lapsed sikh, rather like I was, I would mention that 99% of everything you think you know about sikhism is probably untrue. There is no concept of sin, there should be no guilt, we do not answer to anyone other than ourselves, rather like you already do, the five K's are there, as far as I am concerned as a statement of joy rather than a prerequisite. So in fact, you are already a sikh, as you are asking questions and pushing forward the boundaries of your thinking. 

And now the big question, why should you have a need for such a faith?

Reading between the lines, and observing the comments about your wife, you come across as someone who cannot believe their luck!, but what if it does not last, will it end? Yes, I am afraid it probably will, you sound like you have your wife's full attention, do you have any children, or pets? 

In life, people get ill, they get tired, they get pregnant, things happen, you have to ask yourself if you lived alone would you be so happy with life?

If the answer is yes, then I have no answers for you.
If the answer is no, then my dear friend, you have to be happy within yourself, even if all your other roads to happiness have been shut off. Faith gives us access to the creator that lives within us all, and is present everywhere. Once you have accessed this force, you will find yourself content and happy regardless what is happening in your life, you will be reliant on nobody else, and you will also unlock the key to every question in your life, of course it will take time, but see it as an insurance policy. One day, when you and your wife are old, and you have children and grandchildren, you will not only be able to love all of them, but yourself all fuelled by the love of the creator within you. The first step to this to really know yourself, rather than know what makes you happy and stop there. 

I hope that helps brother


----------



## Pablo (Aug 22, 2011)

Annie said:


> Pablo ji,
> 
> I was raised Christian but left that faith when I was a teenager. I find more truth in other religions, but also a major part of why I want nothing to do with Christianity is that I don't like the attitudes of many people who follow it, or how they have warped the religion to fit their agendas. I wonder, did you feel that way before you left Sikhi?



Yes I did. Purely because of the same reason as you for leaving Christianity. Any book, any hymn, any teaching and any quote  will always be warped by the writer, composer, teacher and quoter - who knows for sure what was actually said or written. It is for this reason I cannot accept anything unless proven before my eyes. Yes that also applies to evolution and the big bang theory. Everything around us has been warped and it makes no sense to me to say one faith hasn't been or is less warped than another and makes even less sense to need to follow such faiths because of the lack of proof that the original ethos has not been tainted ....in any way at all. 

Hang on, I may have just answered my question !! Praise be to...err..myself ?! ( with a little help from Annie !)


----------



## Ambarsaria (Aug 22, 2011)

Pablo ji I find you are little glib about what you write while expecting answers to be precise.  Your approach also appears to follow the same direction.  Now we are having a philisophical discourse so no bad feelings, no demeaning or negative intent is implied and I apologize ahead if you are at all bothered how I am writing and will edit my post if desired or needed.  So let us look at part of your latest post,



> Everything around us has been warped and it makes no sense to me to say  one faith hasn't been or is less warped than another and
> 
> .........  makes even less  sense to need to follow such faiths because of the lack of proof that  the original ethos has not been tainted ....in any way at all.
> _I don't know what Sikhism you understood that you seem to have left.  We all have different understandings.  If you made the effort to understand (not talking about having faith in Sikhism), then let us review how much faith Sikhism demands if its followers,
> ...


Hoping the above adds to discourse in this thread.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Aug 22, 2011)

Does one really leave their faith,or does their faith leave them?


----------



## Ambarsaria (Aug 22, 2011)

Sinner said:


> Does one really leave their faith,or does their faith leave them?


Sinner ji one cannot live without faith.  The question is faith in what,



You crossing the road and assume the cars will stop as you cross the road
You drive a car and you assume no will hit you head on
You take a train and assume it will not go off the rail
You fly in a plane, you assume there will be no explosions or mal-function
Life is a series of assumptions
What are assumptions, times when you don't control or know everything and still go on with what you do
Many many more .............
Is assumptions in the face of not knowing and still doing called "faith".  I would call such that.

Same goes for spirituality.  You can seek full understanding and temporarily have faith in things you don't understand.  But let your faith be a temporary instance, as the grace of understanding is the fruit worth going for.

So faith is always there whether it s spirituality or day to day living.  Those who claim not to have faith in things or concepts till such are proven individually to them are just hallucinating in some inner conceited holiness which is as imaginary as the faith they detest.  Just my thoughts not to offend.mundahug icecreammunda

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Aug 22, 2011)

Sat Sri Akaal Veera

I remember a story about two children one had 'faith'and used go to a place to light a candle the other was jealous of him and would go there after to put it out .

One day it was raining heavily so the 'faithful' one did not go but the other managed to get there despite the awful weather to put it out !

I think the story goes that he was deemed the more faithful and given darshan.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Aug 22, 2011)

Sinner said:


> Sat Sri Akaal Veera
> 
> I remember a story about two children one had 'faith'and used go to a place to light a candle the other was jealous of him and would go there after to put it out .
> 
> ...


Sinner veer ji that is the unknown in life.  One can be here living 90+ years without knowing or discovering much as compared to an excited mind which is looking for and discovering a lot.  Is there a difference in the two, of course there is.  However, that difference does not make one all good or the other all bad.

It is the use one puts to what one knows and not the total of what one knows.  Quality versus quantity argument.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Harry Haller (Aug 23, 2011)

Pablo said:


> Yes I did. Purely because of the same reason as you for leaving Christianity. Any book, any hymn, any teaching and any quote  will always be warped by the writer, composer, teacher and quoter - who knows for sure what was actually said or written. It is for this reason I cannot accept anything unless proven before my eyes. Yes that also applies to evolution and the big bang theory. Everything around us has been warped and it makes no sense to me to say one faith hasn't been or is less warped than another and makes even less sense to need to follow such faiths because of the lack of proof that the original ethos has not been tainted ....in any way at all.
> 
> Hang on, I may have just answered my question !! Praise be to...err..myself ?! ( with a little help from Annie !)



Pabloji

Not all quotes, books and teachings have been warped, Shakespears writings pretty much convey the message of time, without being warped, and he was born in 1564. The SGGS ji was written much more recently, and thankfully, given the way it was written and documented, is a lot more easier to read in its original, than say the Bible. In fact, I have just logged on to wikki, and seen the one of the original writings by Guru Har Rai Ji, and I can just about read it, even though it is handwritten, this is the original, as written and documentated by the Gurus. As sikhism is such a young religion, we do not have the danger of material being warped, as the language is Gurmukhi, which even I can read and understand, although I understand some is written persian, sanskrit and others.

  Most religions will show you the path to self enlightenment in one way or another. I have met many enlightened sikhs, mulsims, christians and jews, I have also  met many fools who know nothing about enlightenment but just repeat parrot fashion what has been written. 

Man has been on earth for many years, in that period, some men have made it their life mission to connect with something bigger, that gives us an answer to life in all its facets, through the pain, the suffering, the solitude, not just the fun times, its easy to ignore this and be glib when you are surrounded by fun,  but is fun enough to sustain you through births, deaths, and more importantly knowing yourself, you are just a snapshot of the good times my brother, does looking at the whole album scare you?


----------



## Harry Haller (Aug 23, 2011)

Even an atheist needs a god not to believe in :grinningsingh:


----------



## Annie (Aug 23, 2011)

I have a few random thoughts here.

I hope I will not offend anyone - no disrespect to anyone here is intended. I'm sure we have all complained or at least read other people's complaints about certain Sikhs who are superstitious, or confuse Hindu or Christian ideas with Sikhi. Also those who confuse Sikh values with a particular community's cultural values. Perhaps Pablo ji has been exposed to too many of these type of people and it has given him a negative view of Sikhi. But the group of wonderful people on this website prove that Sikhi can be a more pure and noble way of life.

Spirituality does not have to be all or nothing. It is possible for a person to study many different religions, take the wisdom from each, and leave behind the meaningless (to you) ritual.

Truth is within you. If you listen quietly and with an open mind, you may be surprised by what your heart recognizes as true.

Just because an idea came along some decades or centuries after the founding of a religion, doesn't mean it is inherently incorrect. It may be, but then again it may not be.


----------



## Pablo (Aug 24, 2011)

Thank you all for your responses, i comment on as many as as i can below...

@ Ishna - apologies for sentence structure, i was using my mobile phone! 
No offence taken at the happy monkey reference but points deducted for the wise one liner "it's easier to paddle in the kiddie pool than learn to swim in the ocean"!

@Lee - "Gurur ji teaches us that all is Gods will, perhaps then you are simply not yet meant to search for God? Or perhaps your karma dictates that you should at this time question your lack of faith?" My dabblings in Buddhism stopped when the concept of Karma came up - I cannot subscribe to any path/religion that states an act of kindness must be done for a better next life because that act then becomes selfish.

@Harry Haller - you said "The fact that you point out the nicer ones to your wife, intimates to me, that she clearly loves you very much, and is willing to accept you fully, and be secure in your love for her, regardless who you look at. Your wife is clearly a remarkable woman, and she clearly values your happiness and outlook on life. I would ask the question, would you be as happy and contented if it were not for the understanding of your wife?" - I  point out the prettier ones because having pointed out (from far away) what i thought was a pretty girl she exclaimed "thats not pretty!". Its a quid pro quo situation as she also points out pretty girls to me! We are as understanding as each other.

you also said "As you have stated you are a lapsed sikh, rather like I was, I would mention that 99% of everything you think you know about sikhism is probably untrue. There is no concept of sin, there should be no guilt, we do not answer to anyone other than ourselves, rather like you already do, the five K's are there, as far as I am concerned as a statement of joy rather than a prerequisite. So in fact, you are already a sikh, as you are asking questions and pushing forward the boundaries of your thinking".

 One problem with this -  is it only Sikhs that ask questions and push boundaries? Does asking questions and pushing boundaries have to carry a label?

you also said "In life, people get ill, they get tired, they get pregnant, things happen, you have to ask yourself if you lived alone would you be so happy with life?" -  well yes i would as a person shouldnt need another person for happiness. If it comes along then its a bonus! 

@Ambarsaria - you said "I don't know what Sikhism you understood that you seem to have left. We all have different understandings." - I think you have hit the nail on the head with that. I couldnt agree more. How do you know whether the teachings that you believe are the correct versions? What if the originator of the translations of the hymns and guidance that you hold so dear are in fact the wrong understandings? And further more, who says whats right and wrong? My point is no-one will ever know what the Guru's meant apart from themselves. Same with Ghandi and the same with Hitler. No-one will ever know their rationale and motivation apart from them. So isnt it easier just to follow your own moral code which takes a bit from here and a bit from there - without a label based on, if you strip it down -  the unknown?

@Sinner - "Does one really leave their faith,or does their faith leave them?" - almost points deducted for a wise one liner but why cant a person have a faith in the most important person there is regarding a mental and emotional state of being, ie themselves.

@Ambarsaria - "So faith is always there whether it s spirituality or day to day living. Those who claim not to have faith in things or concepts till such are proven individually to them are just hallucinating in some inner conceited holiness which is as imaginary as the faith they detest. Just my thoughts not to offend." - Isnt inner holiness what Buddism broadly (very broadly) encouraged? I dont want to get into a debate here but isnt it possible that Guru Nanak maybe took a bit of Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism to create Sikhism? I dont want a debate like i all i am asking is, are you all 100% sure he didnt. If you are 99% sure then there is still 1% of you that must agree then that Sikhism may have an element of inner holiness. If you are 100% sure i want your secret as to how you transported back in time to speak to Guruji personally and discuss with him his intentions when creating his version of Sikhism. (i say that as it couldnt be more different to Guru Gobind Singh Ji's version) Oh and putting a smiley face after your thoughts doesnt detract from a fairly insulting bit of text !

@Sinner - "I remember a story about two children one had 'faith'and used go to a place to light a candle the other was jealous of him and would go there after to put it out .One day it was raining heavily so the 'faithful' one did not go but the other managed to get there despite the awful weather to put it out !I think the story goes that he was deemed the more faithful and given darshan." - Can i just clarify then that stomping on anothers faith in such a blatant way instead of talking to the other child as to why he has the faith results in a prize?!

@Harry Haller - "Not all quotes, books and teachings have been warped, Shakespears writings pretty much convey the message of time, without being warped, and he was born in 1564. The Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji ji was written much more recently, and thankfully, given the way it was written and documented, is a lot more easier to read in its original, than say the Bible"

This ties in very well with my final thought that i have raised above with Ambarsaria. How does anyone know just that any teaching / story / song is what the originator has actually written? What if Shakespeare's plays were written by another and dictated by Shakespear? What if the writer put a spin on what was being said. Minor point but you get the idea. How do you all truly know what you believe in is what was intended by the specific people you  worship? My final thought on this? Live and let live and live by your own made up moral code not by someone elses?


----------



## Ishna (Aug 24, 2011)

> How do you all truly know what you believe in is what was intended by the specific people you  worship?


Ji, Sikhs don't worship people.

Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji is our Guru, the Universe is our Guru, the Sikh is the student, we read, we sing, we have fellowship and we learn.  We grow and apply what we learn in our lives.  We strive to be good people and practice according to what we know.  What more do you need?

Why do people get so hung up on "knowing for 100% sure"?  You will never ever know 100% sure about anything, you can only go on what you've learned.



> Live and let live and live by your own made up moral code not by someone elses?


  You've already decided that's what you want to do.  No one here will stop you.  My personal thought is that I am a student, I don't know everything, there is much wisdom in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, and in the lives of the Gurus, and the wisdom is the key.  If I haven't taken any lessons in the kitchen, the meals I cook will be haphazard.  If I want to cook delicious, wholesome, beautiful food, I may need some more experienced chefs to teach me first.  Then when I have the skills and techniques and know which spice goes with what flavour, I can apply these myself to my cooking and make kickass Aloo Prontha all by myself.  I haven't met anyone who can make aloo prontha without a recipe and some practice...



> Guru Nanak maybe took a bit of Islam, Hinduism and Buddhism to create Sikhism?



You will find some similarities between most religions, because most of them are teaching core spiritual truths for human beings.  Some are more heavily layered with nonsense, or ritual, or rules than others.  But they're all trying to talk about a human, a higher power, that relationship, and human life.  And Guru Nanak Ji through to Guru Gobind Singh Ji had an audience at that time in history, had existing traditions to work with, so naturally their communication will have an element of the existing religions in that area at the time.

Good luck to you on your journey.


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Aug 24, 2011)

Dear Pablo

 I accept the point deduction I deserve it,and I must try not do one liners in future!

Cordially

Sinner


----------



## Harry Haller (Aug 25, 2011)

Pablo said:


> Thank you all for your responses, i comment on as many as as i can below...
> 
> @ Ishna - apologies for sentence structure, i was using my mobile phone!
> No offence taken at the happy monkey reference but points deducted for the wise one liner "it's easier to paddle in the kiddie pool than learn to swim in the ocean"! I think this is an excellent point, you are seeing a very small personal picture of the world, which only concerns you, your feelings, your aspirations, your desires, your world revolves around you
> ...


 firstly, I agree completely, live by your own moral code, people are not there to be worshiped, in fact I am not even sure worship is the correct word, we cherish or love  the bani, the ideals, and the force, the truth that put it all in order, if that cherish and love appears like worshiping, then that is a human way of expression, I feel it is more of a connection myself. 
  I put it to you Pabloji that you are not living by your own moral code, you are living by the code of pleasure and self, from your style of writing, you have ego, pride and you are self centred, other than the fact that your wife appeases your ego and pride, you have not seen fit to mention anything else about her, this seems all about you

I hope I have answered some of your questions, apologies if I have been direct to the point


----------



## Randip Singh (Aug 25, 2011)

Pablo said:


> I am an agnostic who enoys life, is very comfortable with his surroundings and inner being, is not spiritual, drinks, smokes, looks at other women without guilt ( sometimes points out the nicer ones to the wife!) and generally indulges in whatever makes me (and my wife happy). I have no guilt, no urges that are left undone and am happy with the fact that we evolved from apes.
> 
> I have a few things that arouse my curiosity (a) why are mangoes so nice tasting (b) how was the earth placed in such a way so that the sun isnt so near that we burn to death and not so far that we all freeze and (c) what was there before the Big Bang? These queries, however, get a few moments of my attention now and again when i am feeling philosophical . These are not the questions i am asking though.
> 
> ...



I think people above have answered these question far better than me, and I think you have partly answered it yourself.

Me personally I think it's all relative. It's how you understand it. Every book, method of teaching has a certain slant to it from the authors point of view. The author can only convey their understanding and feeling through illustration and example. Unless you live exactly that persons life you will never know exactly what that persons experience are, and even then biologically it would still diffferent for you. It is for YOU to make the connection. If you cannot make a connection then you must move on.

I have some question for you?

1) What do you understand by the word "God"?
2) Is this "God" the same as the idea professed by Nanak of "Onkaar"?
(2a) Have you read or studied any of the Sikh texts (or any other faith)?
3) Have you ever been in a life threatening situation (or loved ones)?
4) If so, what were your thoughts in that situation?


----------



## Archived_member14 (Aug 26, 2011)

Pablo ji,

I had written a couple of responses and decided against posting them for several reasons, one being that they'd come across as being too technical and lacking of humour.  Also I feared that you would be put off by the length of the messages, being slow-witted, you will not get any one-liners from me but what is probably worse. ;-) I can't change any of this but I really wish to share some of my understandings with you. So I ask you from the outset, to be patient.

Like you I was born into a Sikh family and like you I do not believe in God. I wouldn't however call myself an agnostic since the concept of God does not form part of my thought process except when I read and discuss here or overhear my wife's conversations with others. ;-) And even then, I reduce all this to being simply reflection of a tendency to interpret experiences one particular way. 

I have been influenced wholly by the Buddha's teachings, and although I have no expectation of influencing you, I expect however, that some of what I say will be useful. 

You wrote:



> My dabblings in Buddhism stopped when the concept of Karma came up - I cannot subscribe to any path/religion that states an act of kindness must be done for a better next life because that act then becomes selfish.



Just as you know others to possibly misinterpret particular teachings; you'd agree that you too are possibly misinterpreting the concept of karma. Indeed the probability is very high given your source must be one of the many schools out there all of who clearly disagree with each other. And obviously I am just one of those, but I tell you, they are wrong and I am right!! ;-) Don't let this put you off, read on and then decide whether you agree with me or not.

Everything that the Buddha taught points to that which makes up our lives and can be known from moment to moment. Right now as you read this message, there arises and fall away many different kinds of consciousness through the senses and the mind. In what comes across as "me seeing words on a computer screen", there are in fact some very different kinds of consciousness alternating between each other, such that if you really believed in the existence of such an entity as "I" and things such as "words" and "computer screen", you'd be quite wrong. 
Let me explain:

"Seeing" is one mental reality which when it arises must experience a physical reality peculiar to it called "visible object" or simply, "that which can be seen". These two are merely kinds of elements with particular characteristic, function, manifestation and proximate cause. What you conceive of as words and computer screen is the result of another mental reality, namely "thinking". This happens as a result of the influence of other mental realities such as memory and attention which makes it that the object of thinking, namely words and screen are only "concepts", hence not real. Likewise the impression that you have of a "self" who experiences this or that and who can make choices, is also a result of the thinking process based on all the different experiences through the five senses and the mind. So when you end up taking the concepts of "me" and "things out there" as real and existing, this is due to another mental reality, namely "wrong view" or "wrong understanding".    

Wrong view or self-view is from which most Buddhists read the Buddha's teachings and the reason for misinterpretation. But of course this is to be expected. Only if we've accumulated a great deal of wisdom from past lives (I know you are reacting to this ;-)), or if we are fortunate enough to meet such a person, will we at some point begin to understand correctly what is really being pointed at. And the impression one gets is that of a shift in perception, one comparable to taking a quantum leap. Of course, as it is in my case, this change of perception is only momentary and happens only once in a while, at other times, the same old way of perceiving things just continue. This is because the understanding is only at the beginner level of intellectual understanding. This is enough however, to recognize certain wrong perceptions, including those expressed in the form of the different religious and philosophical teachings and ideas out there. One determining factor is that while the Buddha's teachings leads to the 'now' with an understanding to distinguish 'reality' from 'concepts', other teachings in referring to concepts just encourages more ignorance about reality.

So when we come to the concept of karma, we should ask ourselves, what is it? Given what I've said so far, I think you could guess correctly that it must in fact be a reality. What reality? The mental factor of "intention" which arises with all consciousness. 

In the case of the five sense experiences however, intention does not function as "cause" being that these are in fact "resultant" consciousness. And when we are for example, simply attracted to a pleasant sights or sounds, the intention there is not of the strength that will bring results in the future, although it does accumulate as tendency. When it arises during instances such as lying, stealing, killing etc., however, the intention then is strong enough to act as cause for the arising of results in the future. This is the case also when instead, such actions as kindness, moral restraint, generosity and so on arises. In the one the result is bad and in the other it is good. 

So we learn to distinguish two distinct types of consciousness, one which is the nature of cause and the other that of result. We then understand that it is intention in the one, which is what leads to getting to experience the other in the form of either pleasant or unpleasant experiences through the senses. And it is from understanding this relationship that one is then lead to agree with the suggestion that good and bad intention or karma, gives rise to result in the form of rebirth in a happy or unhappy plain of existence. 

So it is not just a matter of "belief" that one thinks about karma and rebirth. Thinking in terms of the next life as being result of karma, is a matter of fact and does not come without realizing that this life itself is result of past karma. And when it comes down to it, indeed it is all happening now, there is results of past deeds in the form of certain kinds of experiences, and there are those that are of the nature of cause for future result. Thinking then, that a good deed will result in good rebirth does not have to imply doing it to gain something. For someone who has had some grasp of the Buddha's teachings, it is clear that the aim is to get out of this whole mess. After all, the first of the Four Noble Truths states that all conditioned existence is Dukkha or Suffering and the cause for this is grasping, which is the second of these four truths. So someone who correctly interprets the Buddha's teachings would do good not in order to be reborn in a better plain of existence, but with the understanding in fact, of the harm of ignorance and attachment. 

The encouragement is always to know the present moment reality by the "characteristic", where no label is attached, for example hatred is different in nature from kindness, is it not? And the understanding is that it is only when this has happened to any extent, that one's confidence in what is good and bad, right and wrong has any real basis. Let alone having to make reference to some set of teachings or teacher in order to then act one way or the other, there is no need even to try and talk oneself using reason, for doing what must be done. This is because it is all about the development of "understanding" which at some point grows to see the value of good for what it *is* and likewise, the harm of evil, the leader of which is "ignorance". 

That said, I think it can be inferred from the above, that a "disbelief" in karma must in fact be an obstacle. This is because it would reflect not only not understanding the present moment, but also not acknowledging the reality / concept distinction. The perception must be that of a "self" who acts and who will receive results in the future, in which case accepting or not accepting karma makes very little difference since in both cases it takes the attention away from understanding the "impersonal reality" that karma is.

So what do you think now Pablo ji, would any of us have arrived at such kind of understanding on our own? Do we not need all the help we can get? And is it not rather that, left to our own devices, the "vices" would rule?  But of course, first you'd need to recognize and acknowledge the vices for what they are, which I'm not sure that you do. Indeed you appear to be trying to justify having some them, and this I consider really dangerous.

What do you think Pablo ji?


----------



## Lee (Aug 26, 2011)

Pablo ji,

@Lee - "Gurur ji teaches us that all is Gods will, perhaps then you are simply not yet meant to search for God? Or perhaps your karma dictates that you should at this time question your lack of faith?" My dabblings in Buddhism stopped when the concept of Karma came up - I cannot subscribe to any path/religion that states an act of kindness must be done for a better next life because that act then becomes selfish.


Hehe then perhaps mate you have misunderstood what karma is?

Karma does not say or force you to do kind acts so that kindness comes back to you but is rather a natural law of actions and consequences.

Tell me do you agree that all actions have consequences and that as a human you should face up to the consequences of your actions?

Karma does not force your actions, you do not need to act kind to get kindness back.  Karama is the measurement of you actions and the natural consequances of them.  Whether you subscribe to gravity or not it still effects you, karama then can be said to be much the same.  It is not dogma to be belived or disbelived it is a natural universal law.


----------



## Harry Haller (Aug 27, 2011)

Pablo said:


> I am an agnostic who enoys life, is very comfortable with his surroundings and inner being, is not spiritual, drinks, smokes, looks at other women without guilt ( sometimes points out the nicer ones to the wife!) and generally indulges in whatever makes me (and my wife happy). I have no guilt, no urges that are left undone and am happy with the fact that we evolved from apes.
> 
> I have a few things that arouse my curiosity (a) why are mangoes so nice tasting (b) how was the earth placed in such a way so that the sun isnt so near that we burn to death and not so far that we all freeze and (c) what was there before the Big Bang? These queries, however, get a few moments of my attention now and again when i am feeling philosophical . These are not the questions i am asking though.
> 
> ...



Pabloji, 

Curiosity has got the better of me, I have some questions for you in a positive sense, I would like to learn from you!

You say you have no guilt and no urges that are left undone, this is amazing, you have achieved what people have been trying for years, you sound competent and are clearly not a mad slave to your desires, can you tell me how you have achieved this, and what is your 'moral code', do you lead a fairly normal life? or is yours spent all day ensuring no urges are left undone?

Are you at complete peace with yourself?, to say you suffer no guilt is nothing short of amazing, do you have discipline? do you have balance, moderation? 

I would be very interested in your answers, as if you clearly have achieved this without spiritual assistance, I think that is pretty remarkable!


----------



## Ajuni (Aug 27, 2011)

PabloJi

To me everyone is Sikh, we just all have different names for it. We are all disciples trying to understand the bigger picture, which is the universe. 
The thing is to me it seems you do have faith, faith that you are in fact agnostic. Your faith is what you believe and how much strength you put into believing what it is you believe. You believe in believing "nothing"

Actually a friend of mine told me a story yesterday, which made me think..i believe it could help you gain insight towards your question.
A story (example...in no way to offend):
A hindu has faith in his philosphy, so he goes to mandir(temple) every friday to leave fruit.
A agnostic has faith in his philosphy, so he goes to temple every friday to throw a rock.

It rains one day... the hindu does not go to temple that day, but the athiest still goes to throw the rock because that is his faith. 
Would it be that the agnostic has instilled more faith than the hindu? 

Faith is what you believe in, and it is different for every living being. whether you may call yourself, sikh, hindu, christian, agnostic, or athiest. all of these examples still believe something, and they believe it with a whole heart. That to me is what faith is, putting every ounce of energy into what you believe. 

The simple question I ask you is, why would you treat your body with such harm, when you know the long term effects that arise from smoking, and drinking. Your body is a "temple" it is your vessel into this life form, you must take care of it my friend. These are words I give to you as a fellow human being who has tampered with her own body through the use of such things, but is it truly worth it in the end? Once your age increases, your body does not have the elasticity as when it was young.

Please even though you do not believe in the sikhi philosphy or other philosphies that promote bodily health, do take care of your vessel. It is the only one you have. In that case believe whatever your heart chooses to believe at this time, so long as you place your whole heart into this belief. It will be a faith entirely your own. 

I hope this was of help and did not confuse you, I hope you were able to understand the point I was trying to make. Though i may not have articulated it very well. 

Thank you for your curiousity though, your curiousity enables myself to grow and reach the point in which I am trying to reach. 

May you find the answers you are searching for.


----------



## Archived_member14 (Aug 29, 2011)

Sikhipyar ji (and Pablo ji),


I was hoping someone would respond, but since no one else has done, I hope that you do not mind that I do.




> To me everyone is Sikh, we just all have different names for it. We are all disciples trying to understand the bigger picture, which is the universe.
> The thing is to me it seems you do have faith, faith that you are in fact agnostic. Your faith is what you believe and how much strength you put into believing what it is you believe. You believe in believing "nothing"
> 
> Actually a friend of mine told me a story yesterday, which made me think..i believe it could help you gain insight towards your question.
> ...




Are you then saying that what Guru Nanak did was essentially to point out the fact that it is all OK? That it didn't matter what anyone was doing and believed in, the result will more or less be the same? Do you not think that one set of beliefs have consequences different from another set of beliefs? Is it not evident that you in believing what you do are looking in a direction different from someone who thinks that you are wrong? Why did Guru Nanak point out the wrongness of thought and action of the people during his time? Why did he emphasize the need to overcome the Five Evils and encouraged moral values? 

It is clear that Pablo ji, in believing what he does, feels justified in indulging in sensual pleasures. Guru Nanak on the other hand, said that Lobh is to be overcome. Does this not indicate that one set of beliefs has consequence different from another, and if one of these is to be considered right, the other must be wrong?  

I think that you are trying to be conciliatory, which is fine. And I don't consider Pablo ji to be a bad person. Also I do not expect anyone here to be different from anyone else in terms of having a great tendency to ignorance and attachment. Indeed, I'd say that my attachments are no less than that of Pablo ji's! What I object to however, are the views / understandings with regard to their occurrences. Pablo ji's is one which takes what is bad for good. And yours although different, however because it does point out the real problem, must indirectly encourage the same. 

If you do not see Pablo's attitudes as having negative consequence and indeed go on to cover it up with what I see as a distorted understanding about such things as "faith", then your position must in fact be no better than that of Pablo ji's. Indeed it is clear that you miss the point when you went on to suggest the following:




> The simple question I ask you is, why would you treat your body with such harm, when you know the long term effects that arise from smoking, and drinking. Your body is a "temple" it is your vessel into this life form, you must take care of it my friend. These are words I give to you as a fellow human being who has tampered with her own body through the use of such things, but is it truly worth it in the end? Once your age increases, your body does not have the elasticity as when it was young.
> 
> Please even though you do not believe in the sikhi philosphy or other philosphies that promote bodily health, do take care of your vessel. It is the only one you have. In that case believe whatever your heart chooses to believe at this time, so long as you place your whole heart into this belief. It will be a faith entirely your own.




The wrongness in alcohol consumption is in that it leads to moral heedlessness. If this is not appreciated and one instead refers to "health" as reason for not drinking, it then encourages only more attachment to me, my body and my health.  

When you talk about "faith", this must be something which is of the nature of "good" must it not? Should we therefore not be more discriminating in using the concept? 

Faith is faith in good and these are two. One with reference to all kinds of good states such as generosity, morality, renunciation, patience, truthfulness, kindness, compassion and so on. The other is faith in the development of wisdom which knows all things as they are and is cause for the increase of good and discouraging of evil. So I suggest that you question your conception of faith Sikhipyar ji, to see whether what you take for faith is in fact what it really is, because if it is not, then by default it must be something which is the outcome of ignorance and attachment.    




> I hope this was of help and did not confuse you, I hope you were able to understand the point I was trying to make. Though i may not have articulated it very well.
> 
> Thank you for your curiousity though, your curiousity enables myself to grow and reach the point in which I am trying to reach.
> 
> May you find the answers you are searching for.




And don't we usually find what we seek? Is it not therefore wrong to be encouraging this given that no consideration is made to the difference between good and evil? And should not you then also question the impression that you get, of "growing and reaching the point in which you are trying to reach"?


----------



## findingmyway (Aug 29, 2011)

Pablo said:


> Yes I did. Purely because of the same reason as you for leaving Christianity. Any book, any hymn, any teaching and any quote  will always be warped by the writer, composer, teacher and quoter - who knows for sure what was actually said or written. It is for this reason I cannot accept anything unless proven before my eyes. Yes that also applies to evolution and the big bang theory. Everything around us has been warped and it makes no sense to me to say one faith hasn't been or is less warped than another and makes even less sense to need to follow such faiths because of the lack of proof that the original ethos has not been tainted ....in any way at all.
> 
> Hang on, I may have just answered my question !! Praise be to...err..myself ?! ( with a little help from Annie !)



A lot of the Sikhi I observed when growing up made no sense to me. I went the opposite way to you. Rather than rejecting it I went back to the source and started reading SGGS for myself. Don't rely on anyone else's interpretation, use others for help but nothing can beat understanding for yourself. Only then can you truly say whether you agree with Sikhi or not.




> My final thought on this? Live and let live and live by your own made up moral code not by someone elses?



Why don't you follow your own advice?? We didn't come to you demanding you to change. It was you who came to us demanding we justify our beliefs. I am tired of having to defend my lifestyle choices again and again in both the real world and the virtual world. Either admit you are searching for answers as you are not 100% content or admit that others can find solace in Sikhi even if you cannot (or will not).


----------



## Arvind (Aug 30, 2011)

Sometimes it is better to DO a thing, instead of getting wrapped into the web of theoretical discussions. Still better, after doing, share the blissful experience.

Bhull chukk maaf ji


----------



## Scarlet Pimpernel (Aug 31, 2011)

Way Ji,to be fair unless Pablo has a forum ,we cannot go to him,we should not get defensive ,Pablo Ji the only problem with ones own moral code, is that one has to be free of worldliness to make a code, otherwise it will be influenced by the worldliness.


----------



## Harry Haller (Aug 31, 2011)

Sinner veerji, 

I think Pabloji's code is intentionally worldly, but according to him, he is happy with that, the problems will start when the worldly items disappear, or when too much weight is applied to the relevant items


----------



## Lee (Aug 31, 2011)

harry haller said:


> Pabloji,
> 
> Curiosity has got the better of me, I have some questions for you in a positive sense, I would like to learn from you!
> 
> ...


 

Harry ji,

I am not Pablo of course but I want to answer this question for myself, and I too would be intersted to see Pablo's reply.

Morality is instilled in a person overe time, and also I belive has much to do with genetics.

I myself have always had a strong moral stance, ever since I can remember, dispite my upbrining and before I ever heard of God or religion.

My faith has only clarifyed that my moral stance is a good one. 

In short religious faith is not the start of a moral code, it is there from birth and changes and grows with experiance.  So it is of course not only possible but probable that those without religion can have a similar morality to thoses with.


----------



## Ambarsaria (Aug 31, 2011)

Sometimes the following is adopted by some and it seems to work outwardly as no one has a way to see inside a person,

American Night / Roadhouse Blues      - YouTube

Love the straight talking "The Doors", and the lead singer had incredible talent but is now no more.

Sat Sri Akal.


----------



## Harry Haller (Sep 8, 2011)

We are all in this together, agnostics, atheists, sikhs, its very easy to say that you think you are so much better than us, that we are so very very good, and you are so very very bad, but at the end of the day, when our time comes to go, if he dies, he dies. 

It is easy to question what we do not understand with insults, yes, insult us, but when the will of man enters into your head, you will come to an age one day, when the battle between man and old man will question everything in your life, ok, you may say, I defeat old man, but the real champion within you can never be defeated, ok you may say, soon I fight real champion, but its not that easy.

What we need are mental chaperons, pujamista, official chaperons, where we go, they go, but none the less, it has to be said, when I first started talking to myself, I didnt like him much, and he didnt like me, but as time went on, I noticed him changing, and some change in me too, well, if I can change, and he can change, everyone can change


----------



## spnadmin (Sep 8, 2011)

tHarry ji

Please pardon my confusion. Who has insulted? It is not clear from your remarks. I would appreciate a clarification in case moderation is needed.  Thanks


----------



## Harry Haller (Sep 8, 2011)

spnadminji, 

sorry, no insult took place, it was just a figure of speech, actually i have read it again, and I am not posting in the morning when I have only had 90 mins sleep, as it actually doesnt really make sense, apologies


----------



## Pablo (Sep 8, 2011)

Lee ji,  Sinner ji, Annie ji, Ambarsaria ji... I appreciate all of your words and i will answer your questions...i am humbled by the time you have taken to read and respond to my posting and all subsequent ones. I mean that with all genuineness...

Harry haller ji, 

I feel you're going to have to go through hell, worse than any nightmare you have dreamed. But when its over, I know you'll be the one standing. You know what you have got to do. Do it.


----------



## Harry Haller (Sep 9, 2011)

Pabloji, 

In his most excellent book,Frau Dedham Tuwal (the old woman of the ring),  the Russian writer, Leonard Drago,  states that life does not consist of rematches, or replays, this is  supposed to be an exhibition fight, this is it.


----------

