Was just going to post this. It was a bit of a strange statement, there's very few atheists who actively push their views onto religious people. There's a lot more religious people who push their views on to others in fact.
I'm struggling to actually recall anyone I know who's tried to force a sort of militant atheism upon me. It's something that mostly exists in online circles...but tends to be in a more snarky, sardonic, piss-taking way than in expressing anything genuinely threatening or oppressive.
And besides, when you consider the atrocities that have been committed in the name of some religions throughout history and certain groups of people who have been oppressed in the name of religion...someone getting questioned on their beliefs is very tame by comparison.
A few Sikh friends from my youth told me that they got special dispensation from the golden temple to allow them to cut their hair/beard, is this true? what is the reason for not cutting hair and what about nails?
Your friends were most definitely lying I'm afraid, most likely to justify themselves cutting their hair/beards. Keeping your hair is a mandatory for a Sikh, and no Gurdwara (not even the Golden Temple- which isn't even the highest authority) has the power to change this under any circumstance. That they specifically mention the Golden Temple makes me 99.9% sure they lying and not ill advised.
So keeping uncut hair is one of the 5 K's for a Sikh, and this is because we believe that this is the natural form of man, so we should maintain this design in respect to God. It is worth mentioning however Sikhism doesn't believe in creationism, so hypothetically if somewhere along the line we somehow stopped growing hair, it's the non-cutting rather than the having that is the key part. Having said that, it is vitally important for a Sikh to maintain his hair and thus a Sikh should wash his hair regularly and comb his hair twice on a daily basis to maintain cleanliness. As for nails, Sikhs only cut the dead part of your nails extruding from your fingertips, not the proximal end (would be extremely painful!). Although the hair we see is technically dead also, it is not impractical to maintain long hair, but it is impractical and unhygienic to maintain very long nails. So the major difference is for functional significance.
Like Penna I've never wanted to try and push my beliefs down anyone's throats but I sometimes get the feeling that the thread doesn't belong to people of religion. If someone asks me a question I've tried to answer helpfully but open ridicule isn't my idea of a good time. I've nothing against you all, most of you if not all are lovely people I enjoy spending time with. People can be good and religious, and also good and not religious but blaming all ills supposedly on religious people who I would say cannot really be religious is a bit repetitive lol. I don't want your money or your arses. If I stopped being a christian would that make me more trustworthy?
I'm a practising Sikh, so feel free to AMA if anyone has any questions about Sikhism! It is a major religion, but doesn't get as much attention as the others do, so if anyone has any Q's I'd be happy to try my best to answer them.
And besides, when you consider the atrocities that have been committed in the name of some religions throughout history and certain groups of people who have been oppressed in the name of religion...someone getting questioned on their beliefs is very tame by comparison.
No. As Sikhs we believe that though not all religions are equal, there are other valid paths to God. In other words being looked upon favourably after death isn't exclusive to Sikhs. In fact the Guru Granth Sahib contains the literature of Hindu and Muslim saints (First I'm aware of a religion including the work of other religious people), and these have been carefully filtered by the 10th Guru for only the correct texts. A Muslim was also chosen to lay the foundation stone to the Golden Temple.
So after death, you are judged in due process (no judgement day) according to the spiritual law of Karma. You are judged according to your thoughts, actions, reactions and spoken words. You won't be judged on whether you were a better Sikh than someone else, or that you were a Sikh at all. Whether you are a Sikh, Muslim, Christian or Athiest or whatever is irrelevant. Everybody is judged according to the virtue of their life, not the religion they were in. An atheist who lived an honest life for example will be looked upon more favourably than a 'Sikh' who was Sikh only by association and lived an unjust life. The soul is what is judged, and every bodies soul is equal. Depending on the outcome, the soul then either remains in the cycle of re-incarnation, or if you were fortunate enough to have conquered your ego then your soul progresses to the spiritual realm (You might say this is "heaven" but it's not the concept of the cloudy paradise heaven that you might think of in the West). Why we believe in Sikhism, is because it describes a way of life in accordance with humility, truth and honesty. Without it, we would easily get lost in the many pitfalls of this world.
No. As Sikhs we believe that though not all religions are equal, there are other valid paths to God. In other words being looked upon favourably after death isn't exclusive to Sikhs. In fact the Guru Granth Sahib contains the literature of Hindu and Muslim saints (First I'm aware of a religion including the work of other religious people), and these have been carefully filtered by the 10th Guru for only the correct texts. A Muslim was also chosen to lay the foundation stone to the Golden Temple.
So after death, you are judged in due process (no judgement day) according to the spiritual law of Karma. You are judged according to your thoughts, actions, reactions and spoken words. You won't be judged on whether you were a better Sikh than someone else, or that you were a Sikh at all. Whether you are a Sikh, Muslim, Christian or Athiest or whatever is irrelevant. Everybody is judged according to the virtue of their life, not the religion they were in. An atheist who lived an honest life for example will be looked upon more favourably than a 'Sikh' who was Sikh only by association and lived an unjust life. The soul is what is judged, and every bodies soul is equal. Depending on the outcome, the soul then either remains in the cycle of re-incarnation, or if you were fortunate enough to have conquered your ego then your soul progresses to the spiritual realm (You might say this is "heaven" but it's not the concept of the cloudy paradise heaven that you might think of in the West). Why we believe in Sikhism, is because it describes a way of life in accordance with humility, truth and honesty. Without it, we would easily get lost in the many pitfalls of this world.
Of course, everyone and anyone of any background is welcome to become a Sikh if they so wish. I'd specifically like to mention caste, as caste was (and in some ways unfortunately still is) a major dividing point in India. Sikhism vehemently rejects the idea of caste, and to become is a Sikh is to reject any association with a social hierarchy.
In terms of becoming a Sikh, most people are born into the religion and hence are raised according to that lifestyle. However for those who are wishing to come to Sikhism from another path, it's usually best to adopt at your own pace and start by learning basic teachings, making visits to the Gurdwara etc. Eventually however, the goal for both is to become initiated into the 'Khalsa' (Community of Sikhs). This is done via a initiation ceremony known as the Amrit Sanchar in which a Sikh commits themselves fully to the teachings of the Gurus. Now this isn't an exclusive club to separate Sikhs and all teachings remain accessible to Sikhs and non-Sikhs alike, but it is a formal recognition and you also agree to adhere to a code of conduct. It is said that becoming initiated doesn't automatically guarantee liberation, but it is a catalyst.
Well there are around 30 million Sikhs or so worldwide, and I'd say at least 97-98% of those were born into the religion. So that means of 7 billion people, only a fraction happened to be born into the right religion (and you don't get to choose by the way), and essentially everyone else is doomed. This would be stupid, but more importantly very unjust (and Sikhism is big on justice). Additionally Sikhism is nowhere near as big as Christianity and Islam, and many people will have little-no interaction with it at all in their lifetimes. Sikhism does not claim to the exclusive path in any way, and we as Sikhs are not as so arrogant to claim as such. We would however say this is one of the better ways.
At the time of Guru Nanak (founder of Sikhism), Muslims and Hindus in India would spend days on end arguing over whose religion is better. However Guru Nanak rejected engaging in these debates, instead telling them they were wasting their time. He simply said 'There is no Hindu, nor Muslim'. Essentially that people had become so drawn into whose determining whose religion is better, they forgot to actually put their respective teachings into their own lives.
This is expressed in the GGS:
All call You their own, Lord; one who does not own You, is picked up and thrown away.
Everyone receives the rewards of his own actions; his account is adjusted accordingly.
Since one is not destined to remain in this world anyway, why should he ruin himself in pride?
Do not call anyone bad; read these words, and understand. Don't argue with fools. ॥19॥
This verse describes how people want to proclaim their God as the 'Real God', and they dismiss the God of the other religion. People want to impose their religions on others instead of focussing on actually being good religious people themselves in accordance with their own teachings. In the end, according to Sikhism, truthful living transcends religious labels entirely.
Well there are around 30 million Sikhs or so worldwide, and I'd say at least 97-98% of those were born into the religion. So that means of 7 billion people, only a fraction happened to be born into the right religion (and you don't get to choose by the way), and essentially everyone else is doomed. This would be stupid, but more importantly very unjust (and Sikhism is big on justice). Additionally Sikhism is nowhere near as big as Christianity and Islam, and many people will have little-no interaction with it at all in their lifetimes. Sikhism does not claim to the exclusive path in any way, and we as Sikhs are not as so arrogant to claim as such. We would however say this is one of the better ways.
At the time of Guru Nanak (founder of Sikhism), Muslims and Hindus in India would spend days on end arguing over whose religion is better. However Guru Nanak rejected engaging in these debates, instead telling them they were wasting their time. He simply said 'There is no Hindu, nor Muslim'. Essentially that people had become so drawn into whose determining whose religion is better, they forgot to actually put their respective teachings into their own lives.
This is expressed in the GGS:
All call You their own, Lord; one who does not own You, is picked up and thrown away.
Everyone receives the rewards of his own actions; his account is adjusted accordingly.
Since one is not destined to remain in this world anyway, why should he ruin himself in pride?
Do not call anyone bad; read these words, and understand. Don't argue with fools. ॥19॥
This verse describes how people want to proclaim their God as the 'Real God', and they dismiss the God of the other religion. People want to impose their religions on others instead of focussing on actually being good religious people themselves in accordance with their own teachings. In the end, according to Sikhism, truthful living transcends religious labels entirely.
Hi AXVnee7, you sound like a knowledgeable person in your faith. Please pardon me if anything I say comes across as confrontational, I don't always mean to be but I do introspectively accept I have issues in that area. I just had a few questions please:
1. Do you believe in one God only, one God but can take different forms (physical or assumed), or many Gods?
2. If what you say above that Sikhism is not exclusively 'preached'* like Christianity, Islam, etc, then is the majority of the world not being denied enlightenment? And are you (not you personally per se) failing in some obligation on this?
*preached does not mean shoving it down people's throats. Its a shame this perfectly meaningful word has become offensive in today's world.
Well there are around 30 million Sikhs or so worldwide, and I'd say at least 97-98% of those were born into the religion. So that means of 7 billion people, only a fraction happened to be born into the right religion (and you don't get to choose by the way), and essentially everyone else is doomed. This would be stupid, but more importantly very unjust (and Sikhism is big on justice). Additionally Sikhism is nowhere near as big as Christianity and Islam, and many people will have little-no interaction with it at all in their lifetimes. Sikhism does not claim to the exclusive path in any way, and we as Sikhs are not as so arrogant to claim as such. We would however say this is one of the better ways.
At the time of Guru Nanak (founder of Sikhism), Muslims and Hindus in India would spend days on end arguing over whose religion is better. However Guru Nanak rejected engaging in these debates, instead telling them they were wasting their time. He simply said 'There is no Hindu, nor Muslim'. Essentially that people had become so drawn into whose determining whose religion is better, they forgot to actually put their respective teachings into their own lives.
This is expressed in the GGS:
All call You their own, Lord; one who does not own You, is picked up and thrown away.
Everyone receives the rewards of his own actions; his account is adjusted accordingly.
Since one is not destined to remain in this world anyway, why should he ruin himself in pride?
Do not call anyone bad; read these words, and understand. Don't argue with fools. ॥19॥
This verse describes how people want to proclaim their God as the 'Real God', and they dismiss the God of the other religion. People want to impose their religions on others instead of focussing on actually being good religious people themselves in accordance with their own teachings. In the end, according to Sikhism, truthful living transcends religious labels entirely.
Hi AXVnee7, you sound like a knowledgeable person in your faith. Please pardon me if anything I say comes across as confrontational, I don't always mean to be but I do introspectively accept I have issues in that area. I just had a few questions please:
1. Do you believe in one God only, one God but can take different forms (physical or assumed), or many Gods?
2. If what you say above that Sikhism is not exclusively 'preached'* like Christianity, Islam, etc, then is the majority of the world not being denied enlightenment? And are you (not you personally per se) failing in some obligation on this?
*preached does not mean shoving it down people's throats. Its a shame this perfectly meaningful word has become offensive in today's world.
Hey, no worries you don't come across that way at all!
1. Yes Sikhism is strictly monotheistic. Fwiw, we believe that others religions worship the same one god, but just in their own ways. In fact God is interchangeably called many different names in the GGS including Allah where Muslims are being directly addressed. When we think of God in the west, one of the common images is a robed man with a long white beard. However according to Sikhism, God has no physical form, and is beyond birth/death. So we wouldn't consider our Gurus as God, in the way Christians might do to Jesus (Trinity). So how does Sikhism define God? It's very difficult to answer, because we cannot comprehend, imagine or quantify God. We can only perceive it upon attaining enlightenment. God is described as being omniscient and omnipresent. In essence the universe is really God pervading throughout, but God also transcends the universe too. Trying to understand God is a waste of time according to Sikhism, because it is far beyond any ones comprehension. I've spoilered below what is called the 'Mool Mantar' (Root Verse); this is the very first verse of the GGS, and describes some of the characteristics of God in Sikhism.
One God
God is Truth
Creator
Devoid of fear/hate
Beyond Time (Eternal)
Beyond physical birth/death
Self Sustaining
Realised through its grace
2. I know what you mean and actually it is a Sikhs duty to spread our teachings to those who are willing to listen, something like what I'm trying to do here. However a Sikh is not allowed to do this with the intention of converting someone to Sikhism. It is for educational purposes only. If someone does actually decide hey I'm interested in becoming a Sikh, then that's different of course. On their travels, all 10 of the Gurus preached Sikhism, however never did they once say to someone 'You're committing this or that sin, you must become my Sikh' . What they did was point out the flaws or hypocrisies in someone's actions, on their own merit (see below spoiler). If that person wished to join Sikhism, then they did, otherwise they remained what they were. This is again, because we believe Sikhism isn't the only path to God.
In terms of who is being denied enlightenment, it is deemed this applies only to the ignorant. If you never once interact with Sikhism in your life, you still have every chance to achieve enlightenment. There have been people who have been enlightened before the advent of Sikhism, and there will be in the future even if Sikhism no longer existed. True, we would say those who are born in Sikhism are considered lucky because they have automatic association with it, but that doesn't mean everyone else is doomed.
Sikhism is open to any one of any religion, every one is welcome to come to the Gurdwara and pray if they so wish. Likewise, the teachings are accessible to everybody. Practicality (IE actually applying what you learn to your daily lives) as opposed to simply learning texts, is the core of Sikhism. It's not about being a Muslim, being a Sikh, being a Christian etc. It's about being a good Sikh/Muslim/Christian etc. I don't know of any other religious scripture which contains literature from saints of other religions, let alone directly offering other religious people guidance, and I think this is the best example that we don't claim exclusivity to anything.
You keep your fasts to please Allah, while you murder other beings for pleasure.
You look after your own interests, and so not see the interests of others. What good is your word? (1)
O Qazi, the One Lord is within you, but you do not behold Him by thought or contemplation.
You do not care for others, you are a religious fanatic, and your life is of no account at all. (1)(Pause)
Your holy scriptures say that Allah is True, and that he is neither male nor female.
But you gain nothing by reading and studying, O mad-man, if you do not gain the understanding in your heart. (2)
Allah is hidden in every heart; reflect upon this in your mind.
The One Lord is within both Hindu and Muslim; Kabeer proclaims this out loud. (3)(7)(29)
The Sikhism equivalent would be a 'Granthi', who reads the Guru Granth Sahib (GGS) to those present. Women have indisputably equal rights to men in Sikhism. Women are allowed to partake in every religious aspect of Sikhism the same as men, and were given this right from the outset.
Unfortunately during the time of Sikhism's founding, women were deemed inferior to men in India (and Southern Asia in general), and consequently treated as such . One of Guru Nanak's first priorities was to condemn (and outlaw) a particular ritual whereby a widowed woman would throw herself onto her husbands burning funeral pyre. The first Sikh was actually Guru Nanak's sister. In Sikh history women were considered equal to men in every regard, being allowed to be Granthis, and even train as soldiers.
GGS:
Man is born from a woman; within woman, man is conceived; to a woman he is engaged and married.
Man is friends with woman; through woman, the future generations exist.
When his woman passes away, he seeks another woman; to a woman a man is bound.
So why call her bad? From her, kings are born.
From a woman, woman is born; without woman there would be no one at all
Hair we consider a gift from God yes, but it's about maintaining that form out of respect to how we have been designed as humans. It's not just merely a 'gift', there are many practical reasons as to why we keep our hair.
I've mention about hair above. Halal meats are prohibited firstly because Sikhism doesn't advocate rituals (this would also mean Kosher meats are prohibited), but also as the other guy pointed out because the animals are killed in a cruel manner. Hope this helps!
Hair we consider a gift from God yes, but it's about maintaining that form out of respect to how we have been designed as humans. It's not just merely a 'gift', there are many practical reasons as to why we keep our hair.
Not sure you can compare hair which grows naturally to the consumption of alcohol.
The Sikhism equivalent would be a 'Granthi', who reads the Guru Granth Sahib (GGS) to those present. Women have indisputably equal rights to men in Sikhism. Women are allowed to partake in every religious aspect of Sikhism the same as men, and were given this right from the outset.
Unfortunately during the time of Sikhism's founding, women were deemed inferior to men in India (and Southern Asia in general), and consequently treated as such . One of Guru Nanak's first priorities was to condemn (and outlaw) a particular ritual whereby a widowed woman would throw herself onto her husbands burning funeral pyre. The first Sikh was actually Guru Nanak's sister. In Sikh history women were considered equal to men in every regard, being allowed to be Granthis, and even train as soldiers.
GGS:
Man is born from a woman; within woman, man is conceived; to a woman he is engaged and married.
Man is friends with woman; through woman, the future generations exist.
When his woman passes away, he seeks another woman; to a woman a man is bound.
So why call her bad? From her, kings are born.
From a woman, woman is born; without woman there would be no one at all
Plenty of practical applications to humans too. The main idea is like I've said maintaining the unperturbed form. I'm not sure what you're trying to get at...
On a very miniscule scale there are yes, for the remaining 98% of Sikhs the religion remains uniform amongst them. There is no immediate danger of having different religious groups on the scale of Christianity or Islam.
Both missing the point. You choose to smoke pot, likewise you choose to drink alcohol. You don't choose to grow hair, you can't compare either pot or alcohol to hair which grows naturally on the human body.
Both missing the point. You choose to smoke pot, likewise you choose to drink alcohol. You don't choose to grow hair, you can't compare either pot or alcohol to hair which grows naturally on the human body.
Would such a position apply then to, say, cosmetic surgery which altered the natural form? I assume so, as that would be a choice to deviate from the unperturbed form.
Or worse, cancer or a burst appendix. Both occur naturally, but feck leaving those bastards alone. If there are unworldly creators, we've been designed by the work experience god.
Would such a position apply then to, say, cosmetic surgery which altered the natural form? I assume so, as that would be a choice to deviate from the unperturbed form.
Comparing hair, to cancer or a burst appendix is comparing apples and oranges. Cancer and a burst appendix present health problems, hair doesn't. It's not one sweeping rule that applies to everything.
Yes, unless there's a medical reason, e.g. facial reconstruction for an acid attack victim.
Comparing hair, to cancer or a burst appendix is comparing apples and oranges. Cancer and a burst appendix present health problems, hair doesn't. It's not one sweeping rule that applies to everything.
So far everything you've explained has been very clear but would it be correct to say it's been the exclusively positive side as well ? Isn't there a dark side ?
Yes, unless there's a medical reason, e.g. facial reconstruction for an acid attack victim.
Comparing hair, to cancer or a burst appendix is comparing apples and oranges. Cancer and a burst appendix present health problems, hair doesn't. It's not one sweeping rule that applies to everything.
So, if medically required and eases suffering, ok. If for pleasure or vanity, not so. That's clear I think (although mental health/cosmetic surgery could get a little messy!)
Yes, unless there's a medical reason, e.g. facial reconstruction for an acid attack victim.
Comparing hair, to cancer or a burst appendix is comparing apples and oranges. Cancer and a burst appendix present health problems, hair doesn't. It's not one sweeping rule that applies to everything.
The concept is wholly ridiculous though. There's no god that decided to give us hair, the species we evolved from were hairy to protect them from cold temperatures. And we've got clothing now, works way better and you can pick and choose outfits that suit the weather. It's not a coincidence that such absurd rules came before darwin popularised evolution.
Or worse, cancer or a burst appendix. Both occur naturally, but feck leaving those bastards alone. If there are unworldly creators, we've been designed by the work experience god.
Yes, unless there's a medical reason, e.g. facial reconstruction for an acid attack victim.
Comparing hair, to cancer or a burst appendix is comparing apples and oranges. Cancer and a burst appendix present health problems, hair doesn't. It's not one sweeping rule that applies to everything.
Comparing hair, to cancer or a burst appendix is comparing apples and oranges. Cancer and a burst appendix present health problems, hair doesn't. It's not one sweeping rule that applies to everything.
I think the overall point he is making, put more politely is that it seems odd that man can pick and choose the aspects of nature that he wants to observe. You would think it would be one rule for all and not picking and choosing the ones that you want. Otherwise your position goes from 'we don't want to mess with nature' to 'we don't want to mess with nature for legal things, it's ok for illegal things' to 'we don't want to mess with nature for legal things that are harmless, but it's okay for illegal things or things that are harmful'. Your position moves every time in accordance with how you feel which some may find peculiar.
)