Nanak born a Hindu in 1469

[bones2098]

My dear friend, if Guru Nanak would have been born in some other religion he could have questioned sumthing there, he was born to live and teach his philosophy.

It's not that if someone is not born in Hindus cannot found a new faith or philosophy. Christ was not born as Hindu (in fact he was born in Judaism religion), but he is the founder of Christianity.

Saying Sikhs exist coz of Hindus is as stupid as saying Christians exist coz of Jews.

this is a what if question nothing is implied & every view is valid.

i like how you tell other posters not to insult each other when clearly you've in directly called me stupid...lol, no offense taken!

"saying Christians exist coz of Jews"

hum think about this one, and ask any bishop this question lol, ever heard of the old testimate?

lol find a better example.


'he was born to live and teach his philosophy'

exactly, how did his philosophy evolve and come to be? either he was taught it, or learned it through every day life. so if he was a muslim maybe his every day life would be different from the every day life of a hindu. thus his philiosphies may have differed & resulted in a totally different sikhism.

don't worry about it too much as I said its a 'what if ...' question, and we can go round in circles.

 

[Ramta]

-

My dear friend, if Guru Nanak would have been born in some other religion
he could have questioned sumthing there, he was born to live and teach his philosophy.

I doubt one can live after questioning Islam. Besides questioning what he
questioned about Hinduism doesn't render him resigned for hell. Even the
Bhagavad Gita questiones certain Vedic principles. In fact Krishna was
needed for the simple reason that Ram was never considered the Ultimate.
There is no such thing as the 'Ultimate' in Hinduism. Everything is open
to questioning. Nanak was only being a good Hindu when he did that.

-

It's not that if someone is not born in Hindus cannot found a new faith or
philosophy. Christ was not born as Hindu (in fact he was born in Judaism
religion), but he is the founder of Christianity.

Jesus never founded Christianity. Christianity was founded nearly 200 years
after Jesus was gone. Do you know, not a single of all the four Gospels existed
even 200 years after Jesus had left ? There is nothing whatsoever to tell us
who wrote them despite the names on them. Not to speak of the fact that
the One Bible gives four not so slightly different versions of Jesus's crucification....

Jesus was born a Jew and spend his entire life as a Jew. Ok, he rebelled,
but against whom. Not the Jewish faith !!

-

Saying Sikhs exist coz of Hindus is as stupid as saying Christians exist coz of Jews.

Indeed. But only as much as someone saying Hindus exist because of the Sikh....

-

All I had asked for is some info as to who were those people who defended India upto the
time Nanak was born. We don't know much about them and this period 652 to 1469.

Thanks

-

 

[abudabu]

he didn't refuse the Jinoo, he just didn't like the existing class system.

and i think the world (sic) philosophical superstitions seems like an oxymoron.

kinda shot your self in the foot when you consider the similarities between hinduism & sikhism...lol

From what I heard, he did refuse the Jinoo. Guru Nanak Devji's father (I forgot his name) was holding a hindu prayer with mantra's recited by the Pandit for his son, and during the ceremony, Guru Nanak Devji was supposed to recieve the Jinoo and wear it. He rejected it, saying that ppl believe in the superstition that wearing the Jinoo and doing these mantra's washes a person off all the bad sins they've done. He also rejected the tilk during the ritual.

In my opinion, the word "philosophical superstitions" is an apt explanation of what existed during that time in India, and this is what Guruji rejected. These included = Idol worship, praying to sun/moon gods, caste system.

I still stand by what I wrote. I don't know if we're just going in circles now. My opinion is not going to change, and I doubt urs is too. So we can respectfully agree to disagree on this topic, if you wish, and rest this.

 

[pps309]

Saying Sikhs exist coz of Hindus is as stupid as saying Christians exist coz of Jews.

-

Indeed. But only as much as someone saying Hindus exist because of the Sikh....

-

I am more than satisfied with this reply.

 

[pps309]

-

India was first attcked in 652 by the Turkhs - Muslims.

Guru Nanak Dev Ji was born a Hindu in 1469.

Therefore India was defended between 652 - 1469 ( 900 years) by the Hindus.
Which ensured that in 1469, Guru Nanak was born a Hindu.

Had these Hindus not defended India so well ( between 652-1469), the whole
of Punjab would have been Muslim by the time Guru Nanak was born,
and he himslef would have been born a Muslim ,and hence no SIKHI ???



So who were they ? Anyone know more about this period, 652 to 1469 ?

-

Thanks

All I had asked for is some info as to who were those people who defended India upto the
time Nanak was born. We don't know much about them and this period 652 to 1469.

Thanks

Are these two colored items matching? You asked more then what you asking now.

 

[bones2098]

haha.. i told you he asked more than one q!

 

[bones2098]

From what I heard, he did refuse the Jinoo. Guru Nanak Devji's father (I forgot his name) was holding a hindu prayer with mantra's recited by the Pandit for his son, and during the ceremony, Guru Nanak Devji was supposed to recieve the Jinoo and wear it. He rejected it, saying that ppl believe in the superstition that wearing the Jinoo and doing these mantra's washes a person off all the bad sins they've done. He also rejected the tilk during the ritual.

In my opinion, the word "philosophical superstitions" is an apt explanation of what existed during that time in India, and this is what Guruji rejected. These included = Idol worship, praying to sun/moon gods, caste system.

I still stand by what I wrote. I don't know if we're just going in circles now. My opinion is not going to change, and I doubt urs is too. So we can respectfully agree to disagree on this topic, if you wish, and rest this.

i wont :P

dude there is no philosphy behind a superstition, other wise it would be a fact!

aristotle would turning in his grave lol....

what is written and what ppl belive are 2 different things, ppl belive that bathing in the ganga will wash away their sins i doubt god will for get an axe muderer..lol

same goes for sikhism, tons of ppl hold kund part thinking they will benefit from it being done, when they don't even hear a single word of it. so theres a big diffrence between what ppl think and what is.

Idol worship, humm what is that? worshiping a material object, treating like a living god.... what the......

have you ever been to a gudwara and done some service, how well do you treat the guru granth?

caste system???? my old man always get stick when he wants to do a saaj part because hes a muna (well he can't help it he's bald!), even though he always weres a pug & goes a beard months in advance.

 

[abudabu]

i wont :P

dude there is no philosphy behind a superstition, other wise it would be a fact!

aristotle would turning in his grave lol....

what is written and what ppl belive are 2 different things, ppl belive that bathing in the ganga will wash away their sins i doubt god will for get an axe muderer..lol

Once again, you're diverging from the topic. I stated that guru Nanak devji refused the brahmin thread and the tilak. That still stands.
As for the philosophical superstition part, NO IT WON'T BECOME FACT.
If 1 person jumps in a well believing he will attain the path to engligtenment, he'll be considered an idiot. If a 1000 people are following him and jumping in the well, will you also join in?
History has been full of nefarious bigots who've persuaded people to dispel common sense and follow fanatic way of thinking. The most recent case being the attainment of 72 virgins by a mujahideen if he pleases Allah by killing infidels. Now I say this is philosophical idealogy in my opinion, will you consider this as "fact"?

same goes for sikhism, tons of ppl hold kund part thinking they will benefit from it being done, when they don't even hear a single word of it. so theres a big diffrence between what ppl think and what is.

I have no control over what ppl do or believe in. If people want to hold akhand paath at home, do pooja's or go to the mecca for hajj, that's there wish. I am neither going to judge such actions as good, nor gonna condemn them.

Idol worship, humm what is that? worshiping a material object, treating like a living god.... what the......

Idol worship is worshipping an idol. Surely you must've seen murti's or different Gods in temples across India and the US.

have you ever been to a gudwara and done some service, how well do you treat the guru granth?

caste system???? my old man always get stick when he wants to do a saaj part because hes a muna (well he can't help it he's bald!), even though he always weres a pug & goes a beard months in advance.

I don't know what the rest of your drivel has to do with my initial post. My personal experience to the Gurdwara will remain personal.
What happens to your old man, is something personal to you and I can't comment on that.

A caste system is the differentiation of a person based on him/her being born a Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya or Sudra. Are you pretending to be naively stupid or are you really that dumb that you've mixed caste sytem with your dad being a muna sardar?


Once again, my main point was that Guru Nanak Devji rejected the jinoo and the tilak, and the superstitious beliefs that came with hinduism at that time.
If you can refute my statement with some proper evidence, I will reply. If all you're gonna come up with is more "personal stories" about your muna dad or asking me questions that have nothing to do with what I mentioned above, then I shall not reply.

Thanks.

 

[pps309]

-



I doubt one can live after questioning Islam. Besides questioning what he
questioned about Hinduism doesn't render him resigned for hell. Even the
Bhagavad Gita questiones certain Vedic principles. In fact Krishna was
needed for the simple reason that Ram was never considered the Ultimate.
There is no such thing as the 'Ultimate' in Hinduism. Everything is open
to questioning. Nanak was only being a good Hindu when he did that.
-

Please don't call Guru Nanak Ji as Hindu or Muslim. He himself said " Naa main Hindu, naa main musalman".
Please refrain from all this. I agree he was born in Hindu family but he rejected both faiths (Hindu & Muslim) of that time. He accepted one universal God and universal brother-hood.

Now, to prove you wrong regarding the questioning of Islam, he did questioned Islam and mullahs too. He asked Mardana to play raqab at Baghdad. He told mullah that music can be connected with Prayers. He took mullah's son to a tour and mullah son told mullah that there are actually more than 9 or 12 planets. He did questioned muslims at Makka that why he cannot spread his legs toward the Mosque. And he was alive after all this and much more questioning to muslims.
It is your dirty mind and your dirty agenda to defame other religions so that you can prove your's is very high quality religion. Live with your high quality religion, I don't have any issues with that. Stop encroaching on us. You want to somehow get support of Sikhs and mix up with you guys so that you can start defaming muslims.

Sorry, we are out. A Sikh is out from both of these faiths. Happy to be out, thanks to Guru Nanak.

For your General Knowledge,
Not only first Nanak, even the consecutive Nanak's keep on questioning both religions from time to time.
Third Nanak, Guru Amardass ji told women to get rid of burqa (muslim culture) or ghunghat (rajput culture). Guru Amardass told this hampers women's growth both physically and pschyologically.
Tenth Nanak, Guru Gobind Singh writes in Tav Parsad Saviye that some people bows there head in west direction, some worships lings (shall I write it in english?) and people do hell lot of rituals but no one is finding the truth of true God.

I am not very intelligent person but whatever lil bit I know, I shared it.

 

[bones2098]

Once again, you're diverging from the topic. I stated that guru Nanak devji refused the brahmin thread and the tilak. That still stands.
As for the philosophical superstition part, NO IT WON'T BECOME FACT.
If 1 person jumps in a well believing he will attain the path to engligtenment, he'll be considered an idiot. If a 1000 people are following him and jumping in the well, will you also join in?
History has been full of nefarious bigots who've persuaded people to dispel common sense and follow fanatic way of thinking. The most recent case being the attainment of 72 virgins by a mujahideen if he pleases Allah by killing infidels. Now I say this is philosophical idealogy in my opinion, will you consider this as "fact"?

I have no control over what ppl do or believe in. If people want to hold akhand paath at home, do pooja's or go to the mecca for hajj, that's there wish. I am neither going to judge such actions as good, nor gonna condemn them.

Idol worship is worshipping an idol. Surely you must've seen murti's or different Gods in temples across India and the US.


I don't know what the rest of your drivel has to do with my initial post. My personal experience to the Gurdwara will remain personal.
What happens to your old man, is something personal to you and I can't comment on that.

A caste system is the differentiation of a person based on him/her being born a Brahmin, Kshatriya, Vaishya or Sudra. Are you pretending to be naively stupid or are you really that dumb that you've mixed caste sytem with your dad being a muna sardar?


Once again, my main point was that Guru Nanak Devji rejected the jinoo and the tilak, and the superstitious beliefs that came with hinduism at that time.
If you can refute my statement with some proper evidence, I will reply. If all you're gonna come up with is more "personal stories" about your muna dad or asking me questions that have nothing to do with what I mentioned above, then I shall not reply.

Thanks.

ha ha only trying to correct your english, you belive what you want ...

you contradict your self in your own post, i can't be bothered to tell you where! you've put me off the subject.

loving the personal attack of calling me dumb OoooOOOoooOOOooo!

or are you just showing your age lol.

 

[userid50966]

hello brothers
sri guru nanak dev ji opposes the wrong deed and superstion that may be of any religion . he rejected the hindu as well as muslims supers tion at that time history speaks by itself

firstly i will tell u about hindus opposes
apart from tilak and jinoo he also rejects there myth of giving water to a sun
and most importantly he rejected to marry like hindu tradition
for his marriage he didn't circles the fire like in hindus at present instead of it he has taken it
around the mulmanter . he didnot disrespect but he opposes the myths made by brahmin at that time to loot a people
he opposes the hindus way of worshiping a murti / statue of any god or goddess
there are many other examples in history if u go through gurunanak life story

opposes muslims too
in muslims at that time it is ban to sing but guru nanak sings god prayer at that time
and was put into jail and than he met a baber the emperor of that time and t5han show him and tell him that singing is not a sin
also in kuran its written that there is 14 or 7 something lithat, has earths and sky and all like that
but in jap ji shib he mentioned that

now still we say that he is partial or hindu or something like that is not good

no body is hindu or muslim or sikh or christian by the birth
he may take birth in any religion ,family but choosing a right path is his own wish
he himself dont wann a people to fight on this matter so se rejected the wrong belief and show the right path to people there is nothing remain to discuss more hindu muslim. because he says, learn through out our life ,that is way he name a relegion sikh learn
and one thing more
almost every one of u listen or heard of the following shabdh
soora so pehchaniye , jo laddea dinh ke het,
purja purja kat marrea kabhun na chadeyea khet.

is written by gurnank dev ji so not only wants a people to do good deeds and worship a god but he also encourage them to fight for a justice
thanks:

 

[Ramta]

OK, the janneyu argument.....
What about the social contract of the five K's every Sikh is required to enter ?
But the rituals of others ALWAYS are mere rituals and the rituals of the Sikh
some great "discipline" ????

How is Sikhism of today any different from institutionalised Hinduism of
five hundred years ago? Brahminism looks more progressive in that nobody
denies Hindus from getting married in a Temple, or getting admission in
school, for not wearing a 'janneyu'.

Will Nanak follow a rehat-maryada, instituted by some committee ??

Customs and traditions evolve over time but what I am saying is how is an
obligation to grow ones hair any different from an obligation to shave it.
And don't you think that if there is one custom that should have been
eradicated long ago is the parampara of carrying the Granth on ones
head and instead reading it. A ritul is a ritual be it Vaishnavi, Shaiviite
or Sikh or Jaini...Does Gurbani encourage these is what I ask....
Were the Guru's God-send with the purpose of starting a new religion ??
Or were they derivates of the environment they were born in ?

-

Please don't call Guru Nanak Ji as Hindu or Muslim. He himself said
" Naa main Hindu, naa main musalman".
Please refrain from all this. I agree he was born in Hindu family but
he rejected both faiths (Hindu & Muslim) of that time. He accepted
one universal God and universal brother-hood.

Sorry, we are out. A Sikh is out from both of these faiths. Happy to be out, thanks to Guru Nanak.

Using one-liner-argument, hey ?
This sentence is a superficial ex-pression of Sikh separatenessand is not
as straightforward as you might wish. Guru Nanak was ever a Muslim,
ergo the half-sentence: “Of Muslims have I broken free”, does not mean
that he abandoned Islam. Therefore, the other half need not be construed
as a repudiation of Hinduism either. Rather, it may be read as repudiating
the whole “identity” business including the division of mankind into Hindu
and Muslim categories.... (No quarrel with that)

Besides not saying the Hindu Prayer no way renders you a kafir...

-

For your General Knowledge,
Not only first Nanak, even the consecutive Nanak's keep on questioning
both religions from time to time.

Kabeer did that. And so did Namdev. But none of them was a Bedi.

As far as Nanak is concerned... well a Nanak in every age acts in a particular
manner. Nanak never fails to point his feet towards mecca. Nanak never
forgets to offer water in the direction opposite to the Sun. Thats what Nanak is.
Tell you for sure, were Nanak to visit the Golden Temple, he certainly will sit
with his back to that gur-granth. Nanak even possibly will start bowing his head
on the ground in the direction opposite to the granth.... Thats what Nanak is.
Nanak never fails. Its the people who always fail him. They well probably even
stop him from getting married in a Gurdwara because he is not the one to quietly
enter into a social contract of the five K's....


-


Thanks

 

[abudabu]

ha ha only trying to correct your english, you belive what you want ...

you contradict your self in your own post, i can't be bothered to tell you where! you've put me off the subject.

loving the personal attack of calling me dumb OoooOOOoooOOOooo!

or are you just showing your age lol.

Great. You're quite smart yourself with the use of smileys in the reply.
I already offered we agree to disagree, but you wanted to continue blaberring on and on without a point. I'm glad this topic is done.
Good riddance.

 

[onlycheema]

abudabu is nailing it man...good going bruva. Good points .

 

[abudabu]

OK, the janneyu argument.....
What about the social contract of the five K's every Sikh is required to enter ?
But the rituals of others ALWAYS are mere rituals and the rituals of the Sikh
some great "discipline" ????

I will answer this.
The Janeyu argument is that it differentiates castes from among themselves.
A Brahmin, a Kshatriya and a Vaishya can all wear the Janeu, but a Sudra (untouchable) can never wear a Janeu.
Here's where the FIRST difference comes in. In sikhism, any sardar irrespective of caste, can keep the 5 K's.
On to the SECOND reason: One is Brahmgandh Janeu (with 5 knots or 3 knots), which is meant for Brahmins and the other is Vishnugandh Janeu (with one knot), meant for other classes. Janeu is generally made of cotton thread; however Kshatriya and Vaishya wear threads made out of hempen and wool respectively.
The 5 K's of Sikhism are:
Kesh, Kanga, Kara, Katchera, Kirpan
The Kesh is the hair, and any Sikh should never cut his hair.
The Kanga is a small comb that Sikhs keep with them to keep their hair tidy.
The Kara is a steel bracelet worn by EVERY sikh and the main reason the bracelet is steel, is so that everyone can afford to wear it. Even the most richest Sikh, to the poorest should wear the steel bracelet.
The Katchera is a loose cotton undergarment, that professes cleanliness.
The Kirpan is a dagger or sword that a Sikh wears. It is because a Sikh is a Sant Sipahi or Saint Soldier.
As you will see, these 5k's are to be followed by EVERY sikh. There is no differentiation, and this is very different from the caste-based difference the Janeu tries to imply by the brahmin superiority.

The rituals of Hinduism are also rituals, but I personally don't believe in Brahmin's being better or worse than a Sudra or Vaishya.

As far as Nanak is concerned... well a Nanak in every age acts in a particular
manner. Nanak never fails to point his feet towards mecca. Nanak never
forgets to offer water in the direction opposite to the Sun. Thats what Nanak is.
Tell you for sure, were Nanak to visit the Golden Temple, he certainly will sit
with his back to that gur-granth. Nanak even possibly will start bowing his head
on the ground in the direction opposite to the granth.... Thats what Nanak is.
Nanak never fails. Its the people who always fail him. They well probably even
stop him from getting married in a Gurdwara because he is not the one to quietly
enter into a social contract of the five K's....

Thanks

I can also reply to some of the questions you've asked here:

Guru Nanak Devji was at mecca, and had gone to sleep whilst his feet pointed towards the mosque. The muslims angered that he was pointing his feet at the mosque told him to move it. He told them to move his feet, and as they moved his feet, the mosque moved with him. This was a showing of how god is EVERYWHERE and not only in a certain direction.

Guru Nanakji offered water in the opposite direction to prove another point.
When Guru Nanak stopped at Hardwar a pilgrimage center on the Ganges river he found a large gathering of devotees. They were taking ritual baths in the holy river and offering water to the sun. When the Guru asked "Why do you throw water like that?" The pilgrims replied that they were offering it to their ancestors. Guru Nanak upon hearing this started throwing water in the opposite direction towards the west. When the pilgrims asked him what he was doing?. Guru Nanak replied "I am sending water to my farm which is dry". They asked, "How will water reach you crops so far away?". Guru Nanak replied, "If your water can reach your ancestors in the region of the sun, why can't mine reach my fields a short distance away?"



As for the rest of what you wrote, I am not so learned to prove it right or wrong but I can point out this:
The "nanak" is a light that passed on from Guru to Guru. So when Guru Gobind Singhji layed down the 5 K rule in 1699 at the Baisakhi Amrit Sanchar, it was the same if the 1st Guruji, Guru Nanak Devji would've done it.

 

[bones2098]

so guru nanak would have taken joy in hunting eh??

 

[bones2098]

just being a teeat!

 

[pps309]

How is Sikhism of today any different from institutionalised Hinduism of
five hundred years ago? Brahminism looks more progressive in that nobody
denies Hindus from getting married in a Temple, or getting admission in
school, for not wearing a 'janneyu'.

Will Nanak follow a rehat-maryada, instituted by some committee ??

Customs and traditions evolve over time but what I am saying is how is an
obligation to grow ones hair any different from an obligation to shave it.
And don't you think that if there is one custom that should have been
eradicated long ago is the parampara of carrying the Granth on ones
head and instead reading it. A ritul is a ritual be it Vaishnavi, Shaiviite
or Sikh or Jaini...Does Gurbani encourage these is what I ask....
Were the Guru's God-send with the purpose of starting a new religion ??
Or were they derivates of the environment they were born in ?

-



Using one-liner-argument, hey ?
This sentence is a superficial ex-pression of Sikh separatenessand is not
as straightforward as you might wish. Guru Nanak was ever a Muslim,
ergo the half-sentence: “Of Muslims have I broken free”, does not mean
that he abandoned Islam. Therefore, the other half need not be construed
as a repudiation of Hinduism either. Rather, it may be read as repudiating
the whole “identity” business including the division of mankind into Hindu
and Muslim categories.... (No quarrel with that)

Besides not saying the Hindu Prayer no way renders you a kafir...

-



Kabeer did that. And so did Namdev. But none of them was a Bedi.

As far as Nanak is concerned... well a Nanak in every age acts in a particular
manner. Nanak never fails to point his feet towards mecca. Nanak never
forgets to offer water in the direction opposite to the Sun. Thats what Nanak is.
Tell you for sure, were Nanak to visit the Golden Temple, he certainly will sit
with his back to that gur-granth. Nanak even possibly will start bowing his head
on the ground in the direction opposite to the granth.... Thats what Nanak is.
Nanak never fails. Its the people who always fail him. They well probably even
stop him from getting married in a Gurdwara because he is not the one to quietly
enter into a social contract of the five K's....


-


Thanks

1) Amrit shakkan lai kisse nu force nahi kita jaanda, haan inspire kita jaanda. Etthe UNP te hi dass do kinne Sikh members ne amrit shakkya te kinneya nu force kita.
2) Rahi gal kesh di, oh ta kudrati aaunde aa, assi nahi vadha rahe. Jad ki thode ch ta shotta bacha ronda hunda te forcefully osdi skull te ustra chala ke paande baal laah dinde aa......hahahahah
3) Brahmins jinna ta koi XXXXXX nahi haiga, kende deny nahi karda temple ya school ch aaun to. Kuch saal pella TV ch hi news aayi si ke South India de kisee temple ch koi lady actor chali gayi te pujariya ne sara temple dhota te shudikaran puja kitti....................hahahahah
Fer huni picchle mahine, koi sc/st minister kisse temple chala gaya, after his visit temple was closed for hours as cleaning and shudhikaran was going on....................

Brahminism is progressive................i doubt.

4) Yes, Gurbani encourage to keep kesh. Gurbani asks devotees that your rom rom should do simran. Kesh is also the rom (living part of body).

5) Guru Granth Sahib came after Guru Nanak. Guru Granth Sahib is not any stone statue (like in temples), it contains Baani of Nanak and others whom Nanak himself liked. How can Guru Nanak will contradict (will not like) his Bani. When someone reads Bani from Guru Granth Sahib, it has Nanak Bani also.
Moreover, if Guru Nanak would have present in physical form fer Guru aap hi bani parounde sareya nu. Instead of doing back at Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji, oh aap saanu bani padounde.




Dedo jinne mainu infraction deni aa.......Ramta je agli post kitti, teri main maa bahen ek karunga...coz thats max I can do on net.

 

[pps309]

Will Nanak follow a rehat-maryada, instituted by some committee ??



Thanks

Guru Nanak surely had followed a rehat maryada. All great guys lives with some rehat maryada so did Guru Nanak.
Why should he follow other's Rehat Maryada, he is Brahm Gyani and others wrote Rehat Maryada based on his knowledge spread through the Gurbani.

Even Ram lived life with some maryada, that's y called maryada purshotam Ram.

Je tainu na pata hove, rehat maryada da har ang Gurbani di kisse na kisse pankti, salok, shabad di tuk to laya gaya.

I am telling you stop, commenting on Guru, Gurbani.
I am pretty sure ke tu puri Gurbani pardi nahi te je pardi v hove tere samjh ch nahi aai honi. So teri ya meri aeni aaukat nahi ke Guru, Ya Gurbani te comment kar sake.

 

[pps309]

First Post there were two questions....see the question mark.

-

India was first attcked in 652 by the Turkhs - Muslims.

Guru Nanak Dev Ji was born a Hindu in 1469.

Therefore India was defended between 652 - 1469 ( 900 years) by the Hindus.
Which ensured that in 1469, Guru Nanak was born a Hindu.

Had these Hindus not defended India so well ( between 652-1469), the whole
of Punjab would have been Muslim by the time Guru Nanak was born,
and he himslef would have been born a Muslim ,and hence no SIKHI ???

These Hindus who defended India upto the time of Nanaks birth are our Ancestors.

So who were they ? Anyone know more about this period, 652 to 1469 ?

-

Thanks

Later on post, changed his stance, denied he asked one question.

-




-

All I had asked for is some info as to who were those people who defended India upto the
time Nanak was born. We don't know much about them and this period 652 to 1469.

Thanks

-

Last post, lot of others question and First post question is totally lost.

Will Nanak follow a rehat-maryada, instituted by some committee ??

what I ask....
Were the Guru's God-send with the purpose of starting a new religion ??
Or were they derivates of the environment they were born in ?



Thanks

Closing this thread as the original thread starter has moved way off from the topic. He asked sumthing in first post, and denied later on that he has not asked such. Then in last post he is asking something else.
I personally believe his posts hurts other Sikh users (including myself) specially when he lacks to give due respect to Guru Granth Sahib or Gurbani or Sikh Rehat Maryada.

I do not think any one of use here has knowledge to discuss this and this discussion seems to be going at blaming each other's religion. Which is not good.