the CHOLA of Baba Nanak and the Quranic Verses !

Society Religion & Philosophy
1

CM, Rani and my Dear Friends… peace be on you.

In the past few threads it has been argued by the our Sikh readers that Sikhism is a separate religion and cannot be attributed towards any other faith, while the major part of Muslim readers referred Sikhism as a subsidiary of Hinduism and their teaching and acts as a true reflection of Vedas.

Today I would like to present the Ahmadi’s perspective about Sikhism. “Our opinion about Baba Nanak is that he was surely a true Muslim. He was certainly unimpressed by the Vedas. After having believed in the Kalima Tayyeba he had undergone a spiritual change in his life which cannot be conceived Without following the Holy Prophet”. We, Ahmadi Muslims all over the world sincerely regard the real Guru Nanak Ji as a sage and one of us and will continue to own him till the last breath of our life. We have no concern with the imaginary Nanak Ji that the Sikhs are presenting to the world.

In order to support my statement I would like to first reveal his CHOLA - The famous cloak that Baba Nanak wore through out his life.

The Chola reverently called the Chola Sahib by the Sikhs is kept at Dera Nanak in the Punjab in a sacred building specially built for the sacred relic left by the founder of Sikhism. It is a long cloak with short sleeves and is made of brown cotton cloth. It is stated in the Sakhi of the Chola that upon Nanak’s death, the sacred Chola passed to his first successor, Angrad, who wore it about his head at the time of his being ordained a Guru and kept it with him throughout his life with great honor and respect. The ceremony of seeking a blessing from the Chola by wearing it about the head at the time of being ordained a Guru was duly gone through by every succeeding Guru. until the time of the fifth Guru Arjan Das. After that it was preserved to prevent further decay.

So far as to the history of the Chola as given in the sacred books of the Sikhs. Tradition described the words written upon it as being words of five different languages, but what these words actually were was known to none. On account of the high repute and sanctity of the Chola among the Sikhs, the practice had become common from the very earliest times of offering to it coverings to protect it from wear and tear. These offerings were made even by Raj as and great Rais who worshipped it and sought blessings from it. As the coverings increased, the Chola itself became a thing quite unseen. The practice, therefore, became common very early of showing only a very small part of the sleeve of the Chola to the worshippers, the rest remaining hidden. Within recent times no one could see the real Chola, the credulous and mostly ignorant worshippers remaining satisfied with a corner.

The words written upon the Chola which tradition describes as having been written by the hand of God remained a mystery until very recent times, it being generally supposed that verses from the sacred scriptures of all regions were written upon it. On the 30th September 1895, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad - the promised Messiah and Mahdi, with some of his companions undertook a journey to Dera Nanak to see the Chola and discover, if possible, the actual words written upon it. The journey ended in a remarkable success. By special arrangements made with the guardians of the Chola, about three hundred coverings, mostly of fine cloth or silk, were taken off, and the words which had not been seen for more than three hundred years were thus revealed. All the coverings were removed one by one and it took the guardians more than an hour to unveil the hidden words of the Chola. As the last covering was taken off, a startling disclosure was made. There was not a single verse of the Vedas or any other religious book upon it except the Holy Quran, nor was they’re any writing upon it in any language except Arabic. From top to bottom the verses of the Holy Quran, especially those refuting the false doctrines of other faiths with regard to Divine Unity and attributes, were written upon it.

The part revealed first of all contained the well-known verse with which the Holy Quran itself and every one of its chapters begins, “In the name of God, the most Merciful, the most Compassionate.” Then followed the reputed formula of the Muslim, "Nothing deserves to be worshipped besides God, and Muhammad is the Messenger of God.’ When this revelation was made, the guardians shrank a little from further disclosure but they were prevailed upon by various inducements. Verse after verse of the Holy Quran was then revealed. I quote here two or three examples.
**“Verily the true religion with God is the faith of Islam”.

“Say, God is One. Everything owes its existence to God, but God owes His existence to none. Neither does He beget, nor is He begotten, and there is none like unto Him.”
“Verily those who enter into thy bai’at, 0 Prophet, enter into the bai’at of God.”**
Besides these there were the well-known verse known as the Ayat ul Kursi, the Chapter entitled the Help, the chapter entitled the Fatiha, the names of the Divine Being mentioned in the Holy Quran, and several other verses of the Quran, in all of which importance is attached to adherence to the principles of Islam.

Is it only a chance with no purpose beneath it that the Chola of Nanak, has verses of the Holy Quran written upon it? The whole history of the Chola belies such a supposition. Nanak wore the Chola that no one might be deceived as to the religion he professed. The evidence of the Unity of God and of the Divine mission of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (peace be on him) was not only uttered by his lips, but was expressed on his very clothes. How could he be best known as a Muslim except by wearing a cloak, which could not be worn by any, but the truest Muslim? Wherever he passed he was a easily known to all as a Muslim, and perhaps this was the reason that when he set his foot on Hindu ground, the place was at once purified with cow-dung; urine and dung of cows being the things which are superstitiously believed by the Hindus to purify, and are even administered to human beings when they are deemed to have done an unholy deed. The asserted origin of the Chola also corroborates the conclusion that Nanak wore it as an apparent sign of his being a Muslim. Being a Hindu by birth, he could not for a moment wear the Chola unless he had renounced the faith condemned by the words of the Chola. The Chola, in fact, affords the only uninterrupted, and, therefore, the only sure testimony of Nanak’s religious principles. It is a thing which Nanak’s own hands prepared and it did not, like the Granth, come into existence a century after the founder.

In 1994 some Ahmadis were sent to Daira Baba Nanak from England. With the permission of the noble family who were in charge, they took some pictures - still pictures as well as video and we are in possession of these. I have scanned some of them for you guys.

:::> **http://zalim.homepage.com/chola_nanak.jpg

[PS: DONT CLICK.. the link is not working, please “cut&paste” the above address in a “NEW” browser window. Thanks]**

You can clearly see, even for the fact that some of the writings are a bit smudgy, not obliterated, but do not have the same quality as they had previously, but they are legible. So anybody who is interested can see - Surah Fatiha (from the Holy Qur’an) written on it, La ilaha ilialah Muhamadar Rasoolullah and no verse of any other book is mentioned there at all. Those who believe that he mixed religions, like Akbar attempted to do, that he took something from Hinduism, something from Islam and as such he molded a new religion, that Chola stands as witness against them. There is nothing but Islam mentioned on the Chola. So these are the reasons why we believe that Sikhism is a continuity of Islam, a sect in Islam which was a Sufi sect but, unfortunately, because of the political fights with the so called Muslim government of the time they were thrown apart and the more they went into the political fights for the supremacy in Punjab against the Moghul Empire, the more they started drifting away from the religion of Islam until they began to hate it.

Thats all for now, later on I will try to unveil his other aspects being a Muslim.

thankx

[This message has been edited by Zalim (edited March 08, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Zalim (edited March 08, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Zalim to update the link.]

[This message has been edited by Zalim (edited July 22, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Zalim (edited July 22, 2000).]

2

Zalim yar, I admire your persistent research and hard work BUT....

Guru Nanak was founder of a religion called Sikhism. Now I guess some people think he was a Hindu others think he was Muslim. Why don't you both sort this problem amongst yourselves? :)and let us knwo whatever the verdict is....because I think he was a Sikh and founder of Sikhism.

I don't know the story of the chola but in Sikhism, such artifacts are regarded as respectable but are not worshiped as per the scriptures. Only thing thats is worshiped is Guru Granth Sahib as a Guru.

I have read stories like yours before Ahmadis trying to prove that Nanak was a Muslim. Its nice to know you guys have respect for Baba Nanak and you have the right to do so but that does not make him Muslim. in my view you guys have bigger problems than that. First sort it out wheather Ahmadis are muslims or not. We will talk about Nanak later :)

Popel who come up with theories like this are delusional and are in continuous search for prophets and saints for their spiritual fullfillment. Plenty of them in every religion and every sect.

CM

3

ChanMahi, thanyou for stopping by. I am sorry to say but it seems as if you haven’t read my post or you don’t know anything about your faith, just following it very blindly as the others do. Anyways I can argue you with proofs and try my best to substantiate that Sikhism is part of Islam. Apparently, I cant change you.

I am sorry but your reply needs a long response. If you cant read it, save it for the leisure time.

CM let me tell you something, the asserted origin of the Chola supports that that Nanak wore it as an apparent sign of his being a Muslim. Being a Hindu by birth, he could not for a moment wear the Chola unless he had renounced the faith condemned by the words of the Chola. The Chola, in fact, affords the only uninterrupted, and, therefore, the only sure testimony of Nanak's religious principles. It is a thing, which Nanak's own hands prepared and it did not, like the Granth, come into existence a century after the founder.

*>> ChanMahi says: “....I don't know the story of the chola but in Sikhism, such artifacts are regarded as respectable but are not worshiped as per the scriptures. Only thing thats is worshiped is Guru Granth Sahib as a Guru. *

There are strong and valid arguments showing that the chola is the very cloak, which Nanak wore as a sign of Islam, and is still the symbol of high repute and sanctity.

> Firstly, it is mentioned in the Sakhi of Angad, Nanak's first successor, and the sakhi is one of the earliest writings of the Sikh religion.
> Secondly, there is a book in the hands of the descendants of Kabli Mal, the present guardians of the Chola, known as the Chola Sakhi, and in it, it is clearly stated that the Chola was the gift of God to Nanak, and that his successors all sought blessings from it and honored it. This is a clear proof that the Chola has ever been regarded as the spiritual gift of Nanak to his successors and as a source of blessings.
> Thirdly, the Chola has been honored and respected and even worshipped by the followers of Nanak continually during the four hundred years which have elapsed since it came into existence. Annual fairs and gatherings have also been always held in connection with it, and the coverings that have been offered from time to time by Rajas and Raises are a standing testimony to the honor in which the Chola has always been held by people of all classes among the followers of Nanak. This evidence shows clearly that Nanak did not hang between Hinduism and Islam, but that he was Muslim in the true sense of the word.

I am a Muslim, how about if I start wearing 5K’s and read Granth through out my life, what would you say, who am I??. A Muslim or a Sikh??

Why Guru jee wore that Quranic versed cloak till death and not the 5K’s?? If he was a Sikh then he should have wore it, isn’t?. Later five of his consecutive successors wore the same Chola. Why is that??

”Let me tell you something over here, his fifth successor, Guru Arjan, who was an active an ambitious man, laid aside the dress which had been worn by all his predecessors and converted the voluntary offerings of his disciple into tax. This raised him to some importance, and enabled him to take men into his pay, a proceeding which conferred additional dignity upon him, and, at the same time, intensified the jealousy of his Muhammadan neighbors. As an additional means of uniting his community into one compact body, he collected the words of Nanak, and those of other saintly personage into a book, which he called Garanth, i.e, the book, and strictly enjoyed his followers to accept no speech as authoritative which was not contained in the book”.

You still want to call it an artifact?

Sir I am trying to prove but I guess you are not prepared to read my posts.

>> ChanMahi says: “....I have read stories like yours before Ahmadis trying to prove that Nanak was a Muslim. Its nice to know you guys have respect for Baba Nanak and you have the right to do so but that does not make him Muslim. in my view you guys have bigger problems than that. First sort it out wheather Ahmadis are muslims or not. We will talk about Nanak later”

It absolutely doesn’t matter whether someone consider me a Muslim or not, that my faith, I love it, even its wrong in the eyes of others. We have a mission, We have a task to accomplish and that to GATHER EVERYONE UNDER ONE ROOF, “the roof of Holy Prophet”(sa) to whom your Nanak Sahab also cherished all his life. For now I am just trying to unveil your faith through the knowledge I have attained. I can debate on you till end, only if are not rigid and have ample proofs to justify your side.

In Ahmadiyya the position of Nanak is completely different. The founder of the Ahmadiyya Community said that I am told by Almighty God that Guru Baba Nanak was a holy man and as such he must be revered. Anyone who speaks any word in dishonor of Guru Baba Nanak will be cast out from among those who fear Allah and he based this claim on some evidence found in the Sikh literature and Sikh traditions.

First of all, he pointed out that all the Sikhs agree without a shadow of doubt that Hazrat Guru Baba Nanak used to say PRAYERS like Muslims. All the Sikhs agree that Guru Baba Nanak went to the Ka'aba (Mecca) for performing HAJJ. All the Sikhs agree that his first 'Murshad' (spiritual teacher) was a Muslim saint, near Nankana Sahib in Sheikupura, Pakistan, and again, all of them believe that a large number of his followers were drawn from the Muslim faith, and Bhai Murdana, for instance, is one of the leading figures.

The most important historical evidence in favor of this claim is that although you know that Muslims are extremely sensitive, or for the last few hundred years at least have become extremely sensitive to anyone who renegades or changes his faith to some other faith, not a single Muslim who followed Hazrat Guru Nanak Sahib was either abused or stoned or put to death or we do not even hear a single Mullah giving the verdict that whosoever follows Hazrat Guru Baba Nanak would be cast out of Islam. While if he had invented a new faith, or if God had revealed to him a completely new faith, then this should have been the logical outcome. Now, this is of vital importance because when you read this in conjunction with whatever Guru Baba Nanak did and the way he maintained a position, a conciliatory position, between the Hindu converts and the Muslim converts, then you come to understand that he was a mystic, a great saint who was one of the mystics in Islam.

>> ChanMahi says: “....People who come up with theories like this are delusional and are in continuous search for prophets and saints for their spiritual fulfillment. Plenty of them in every religion and every sect”.

Oh CM wake up, smell the coffee. Did my pictures make you delusional?? Are they FAKE. Sir If you cant decipher them, ask anyone on the forum to interpret it for you. And by the way this chola of Nanak Sahab is not sketched by Nasty Ahmadis. Its yours and yours to possess.

He wore that Chola (a robe), all his life till his death and that Chola is still preserved in Daira Baba Nanak. And it was the Promised Messiah, Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmadas, the founder of the Ahmadiyya Community who, having been divinely guided, declared for the first time that the Chola has some inscriptions on it and those inscriptions are entirely either from the verses of the Holy Qur'an or repetition of the Islamic Kalima, ('La illaha illallah Muhammadur Rasoolullah').

My friend if you want to discuss your faith, first try to understand it. Just following it blindly doesn’t make any difference.

>> ChanMahi says: “....Now I guess some people think he was a Hindu others think he was Muslim. Why don't you both sort this problem..... and let us know whatever the verdict is..”

Now you need a verdict? Han? Ok here it goes....

>> HE WAS NOT A HINDU BECAUSE: <<

Soochnay ki baat hai kay, Pegans were not there at that time, Buddhist were too far and conserved. Whos left, the Hindus and Muslims. Now being born in a Hindu family, He cant openly condemned teachings of Vedas. In fact he was very against the teaching of Vedas like for example....
**
· "Guru Nanak Ji studied the Vedas and Shastras seriously and deeply but gave them up as being unimpressive." (Nuskha Akhbar Dyanandian p. 197.)
**
· "Guru Nanak Ji never professed the authenticity of Vedas with any respect or reverence like the other followers of Vedas, nor did he believe that the Vedas are Divine books, nor he considered that the contents of Vedas could teach lofty virtues of truthfulness and honesty." *(Guru Sat Dershan . p. 91)
*
· "Guru Nanak Ji refuted and rejected the Vedas by describing them as creators of crisis (trouble shooters) preachers of sin, stores of material greed and the teachings of which drive one farther away from God. He dubbed their adherents as followers of dictates of mind, eligible to punishment at the hands of the Angel of Death and liars of the first rate. " (Khara Khalsa p. 118)

There are so many examples that clearly shows that he was not a Hindu. Who’s left?? The Muslims.

**>> HE WAS A MUSLIM BECAUSE: <<

· He use to pray 5 times a day. (“Five times he prays, he read the book of Quran –p37”)
· He recites Quran which he use to carry in his pothi (a satchel)
· There is also a tradition in Janam Sakti that he preformed pilgrimage to Mecca.
· His first Murshid (spiritual teacher) was a Muslim. (Sheikh Farid ra)
· In Nanak we see reflection of Muslim FAQIRS (not of Hindu SÁDHUS)
· His cloak inscribed with Quranic verses is a true witness.
· His own words speaks of himself “I am thankful to God of Glorious Throne that I am a Momin”**

(LAST WORD: Hindu dont believe in Allah beside this word “Allah” is only used by MUSLIMS, not Jews, not Christians, not even by any other religion)

thankyou for your time and patience.

[PS] Just one more question. Can you please let me know, where can I find his claim that he was a SIKH and he founded SIKH RELIGION, thankyou.

[This message has been edited by Zalim (edited March 09, 2000).]

4

Cholla Cholla Cholla Cholla Cholla...Cholla...Cholla..Ok

Ok Ok here I said it atleast 7 times. Is it enough now for you to declare me a muslim or I need to recite it all night? You are such a superficial person when it comes to your views about God and religion. No one becomes a Muslim by wearing a cholla......no one becomes a Sikh by wearing a turban....or whole of Afghansitan would been Sikh by now...no one becomes a Hindu by wearing a dhoti...majority of them don't wear it any more. Its the belief. The belief.

Guru Nanak did go to Kaaba....so did many other people at that time...(I suppose it was allowed back then)...big deal. I see lot of non-sikhs going to golden temple to pay a visit...are they now all sikhs?

I wear a t-shirt with Nike logo a lot. Got it cheap at the free market. I hope my religion is not Nike...(not that I wud mind, its a pretty rich company...few hundred sticks will help for the retirement:)).

let me tell you....the book "the granth" says, "Awal Allah noor upayeya qudrat ke sabh banday, aik noor te sabh jagg upajjeya kaun bhallay kaun manday"

If God is one, it is of course the same no matter what we call it. Religions are different ways of reaching up to Him...and when you reach the manzil, no one asks which way you came... Please go a bit deeper. Talk to your soul...talk to your God....pray to your God rather than spending all your energy and time proving and convincing people the unprovable and unconvincable... would ya?

CM

5

Here is I, not knowing anything about the cholla....and there is my dear friend Zalim, knowing everything about cholla, that possibly can be known....and whole burden of me being a Sikh...or rather Nanak being a founder of Sikhism is based upon it...huh!!

I possibly cann't win it. So dear friend Zalim, tell me when I come for sunnat?(I am sorry I cann't bring Baba Nanak for it...too late)...I am the only you got...if that gives you some peace of mind? It important to me too as a friend.

CM

6

Mirza ChannMahi Yar, I don’t know a thing about the deal about Ahmadi’s views of Baba Nanak and his lousy Pata oya Chola. The only thing I know and I am sure of is that you and I have something very special in common (in addition to our Nike shirt).

7

First of all, I am not Ahmadi.
Secondly, CM, I dont think Zalim is trying to tell you what you are. Its clear that sikhism today is not a branch of Islam and in my opinion no where near it. I think both sides prefer it that way. Although Zalim has provided interesting research. Not just about the chola, but about evidence in your own holy books. Who knows what Guru Nanak really was but I personally don't care. So CM, you can keep Guru Nanak for yourself as a sikh, It doesn't affect Islam or Muslims :)
He was not a prophet so it doesn't matter to ISLAM, islamically speaking, only the prophets from Adam (alahi salaam) to Muhammad (S.A.W.) were the true messengers of Allah. You have to believe in ISLAM to be a muslim, you can't be proved it or declared it just because your GURU wore a chola. My ancestors could have been anything, what matters is that I am muslim today, not what my ancestors were.

One question for you CM which I just thought of after reading your post, you say your holy book says
"Awal Allah noor upayeya qudrat ke sabh banday, aik noor te sabh jagg upajjeya kaun bhallay kaun manday"

Why would a holy "sikh" book use the word "Allah"??? as Zalim said, only muslims use this word for God, no other religion uses it in their holy books. So why would the sikh holy book have this?

8

Chan ji…
“MeiN nai mann’na tay nai mann’na…ker le ju kerna ee…”
thats what u r doing

http://www.pak.org/gupshup/rolleyes.gif

9

hmmm...I posted a message around 10 AM this morning....after Naik's message. Interestingly its not there.
Anyways.

Strongman:
"You
have to believe in ISLAM to be a Muslim, you can't be proved it or declared it just because
your GURU wore a chola. My ancestors could have been anything, what matters is that I am
Muslim today, not what my ancestors were."

I exactly agree with your sentiment. That's what I have been trying to say to zalim bhra....it may not have come out the right way.

One does not become a Muslim, Sikh or Hindu just by visiting their respective places and wearing their attire. It has to be from the inside. Nanak visited most of the religious places, at least the big ones, of Hindus and Muslims. It is actually amazing that at those times he traveled on foot as far as Mecca and Baghdad and in all directions north south from his native place, Punjab. He was a seeker of spirituality and very tolerant of other faiths, even thought he condemned some rituals followed by ppl of the time. It can not be held against him.

Zalims, whole thesis revolves around 1.)that cholla and encryptions on it and 2) Nanak got along well with common Muslim and visited Mecca and 3)
references of Allah in Sikh scriptures.

As mentioned earlier I am not a religious scholar and but some of these points can be easily refuted.

1) since Nanak went to visit Mecca and other places in Muslim countries, it is said that that cholla in fact was given to him as a gift by some Muslim friend/follower. zalim has mentioned that it was a gift to Nanak from God. I am not sure how God would have given him the gift of some physical thing like cholla. God usually blesses us with non-material things like, knowledge, power, peace etc, but saying that God gave him that gift does not fit the logic. If it has Qoranic encryptions on it, that makes sense. I am not sure about zalim's sources but it is more than possible that it has Qoranic encryptions on it. Why? Because it was given to a saint(Nanak) by a Muslim follower as a gift. What was supposed to be encrypted on it? Geeta or Ramayan? or some kind of paintings? of course if the gift giver encrypted something on it must be some sacred text from his religious book. I am not sure how just wearing that cholla could have changed nanak's faith. I don't believe for a moment that Islam is such a dogmatic religion that only by wearing a cholla one gets converted. Most Muslims will agree with me on that.

In fact, if Nanak kept that cholla with such respect because it was given to him by a Muslim well wisher and has Qoranic encryptions on it tells me that he did respect Islam as a religion. He and his followers were not born as enemies of Islam as is made out by some people. Later enmity and clashes between Sikhs and Muslim rulers were more historic and political in nature and not based upon religious philosophy of the Sikhs.

  • Zalim mentions that passed onto other Guru hood was passed on to next Gurus by passing on to them this cholla. I don't know where he got his facts, but Guru ship was passed on to the next one by making a saffron mark on the forehead(a religious/cultural event even today at the time of shagun, shadi etc amongst the Sikhs).

  • Zalim said"It is a
    thing which Nanak's own hands prepared and it did not, like the Granth, come into existence
    a century after the founder."

So now it was hand made and written by Nanak himself? A few paragraphs earlier you were saying and I qoute"it is clearly stated that the
Chola was the gift of God to Nanak" Make up your mind my brother. You are contradicting yourself so much that I am feeling it is utter waste to even reply to your hallucinations.

Further by saying that granth came into existence 100 years later, are you are implying that cholla was made by nanak himself while writings in Granth sahib were made up later? Interesting. Wake up and smell the coffee! All of Nanak's writings were written by himself and complied into pothis(small books). Granth contains writings of only 6 Sikh gurus out of 10 but includes writings of about couple of dozen other saints, like Kabir, Baba Farid, Bhagat Ravidas,Bhagat Dhanna, and many others. They were written and published at different times over a period of about 600 years. Earliest being by Baba farid and Latest by Guru Gobind Singh. Granth Sahib was a granth started by Nanak and other Gurus added to it while most of the editing was done by Fifth Guru, Gobind Singh only added a little to it later before completing it. Editing here means re-arranging the hymns by theme etc. No one changed a word after that. Not even later Gurus.

Finally I would like to say in this context, that Nanak's religion can not be judged by what color clothes he wore and where he went, but only from his writings. Which clearly stress on humans to live a simple and honest life and remember God because they have to re-unite with God after death. The idea of humans being part of God's existence who are separated from Him and will be re-united back to Him, is not Islamic at all. If I am wrong here, I would love to hear about it.

2) Nanak grew up in Talwandi, Punjab, Pakistan. Region at that time (1450s) was relatively peaceful, considering few hundred years before and after. he grew up in a composite society made up of Hindus and Muslims. Of course he preached to all Hindus and Muslims. he was not asking anyone to convert. Sikhism was at a very basic stage of development at that time. I am sure if he asked Muslim listeners/followers to convert, story would have been different.

Later on, when Babar invaded Punjab and eastward, Nanak wrote against his tyranny. he condemned it and was prisoned and made to 'peeh chakki' in jail. It is not hearsay. these are facts and can be found in any book on history of Punjab or Sikhs.
In fact he voiced it very strongly in my opinion. Here is a hymn...in Punjabi by Nanak on Babar's invasion. Mughals didn't understand Punjabi otherwise in my view 'chakki peeh' was a very lenient punishment for it in those days:)

"paap ki jhanjj lai KabloN dhayea, joriN mangay daan ve lalo.
qaziaN bahamnaN ki gall taggi, aggad paRhe shaitaan ve lalo.
sharam dharam doyeiN chhapp khalotay, kooRh phirey pardhaan ve lalo."

jhanj=baraat
joriN= jor naal, zabardasti
gall taggi= gall mukki
aggad=nikah, wedding ceremony
chhapp khalotay=disappeared
kooRh=jhooth, evil

As I mentioned earlier, Mecca was not the only religious place he visited. He also visited lot of Hindu shrines in south India and Bengal side. so it is a moot point.

3) "the granth" not only contains writings of Sikh Gurus but others saints also whose backgrounds and faiths were different that Guru's own. This is a good example of respecting others beliefs and lives while building on common goals or themes where you agree.
Others included, who mentioned Allah and other names for God several times are:
Baba Sheikh Farid
Bhagat Bhikhan
Bhagat Kabir
Baba Mardana
Bhagat Sain
Bhagat Namdev
Bhagat Ravidas
Rai Balwand and Satta etc.

you can see it is a collage of the writings by saints of different faiths which Sikhs adopted as their Guru. It should not bother Sikhs and also non-sikhs that God was called by so many names in the granth. It is something that Sikhs are proud of and others should share that pride also.

Some pother points made above are.

  • "Just one more question. Can you please let me know, where can I find his claim that he was a SIKH and he founded SIKH RELIGION, thankyou."

Baba Nanak gave Guru ship to the second Guru by himself and thought of him as the most appropriate person to spread his message in the world and so to the gurus who followed him and all that is well recorded in the history. Of course I am sure he did not declare and shout aloud and make any claims...he was a very humble man. Claiming by him won't mean anything unless his followers did not believe in him and they did.

You above comment is in a way very arrogant and filled with lot of hatred for the very existence of Sikhism. probably shows the true motive behind starting this thread.

Naik ji...gall manan jaaN na manan di nahi ay. I don't claim my self to be knowledgeable enough to debate on serious matters like religion. of course it is easy to take one issue and point a finger at it. basically that's what Zalim was doing and....I have myself done many times in the past.

I also don't claim to be a defender of Sikhism as I have said many times before. But lot of stuff that my friend claimed does not stand up to even common sense let alone serious logic.

"Kar lo jo kerna ee???" so thats what you think. Interesting!! Of course he can cut and paste all the evidence he can. It looks to me like a Phd thesis he has written somewhere. His argument started with respected Mirza Ghulam Ahmad's enquiries into Sikh relics. By doing so zalim is projecting him as someone who was more interested in poking his nose in Daira Baba Nanak, a Sikh shrine, than preaching to his followers what God has communicated to him regarding how we mortals can make our lives peaceful and according to God's will.

Thats it...it is too late in the night. May be some other time. Take care.

CM

10

STRONGMAN, SWEETMAN: I agree with your statement, we cant say sikhism as of today is a branch of Islam but that what one of our mission is, make it a part of it. Dont you agree? thanks anyway

NYAhmadi, humain nahin btain gay whats so “special”, hain??

http://www.pak.org/gupshup/biggrin.gif

http://www.pak.org/gupshup/biggrin.gif

My NaikParosun, gussa thuko jee,… tussi ainj kero ja kay meethi meethi lassi peo jee. :slight_smile:

** Bhra CM** you dont have to spell seven time CHOLAx7… to be a Muslim, just one time recite what’s written on it viz. ‘La illaha illallah Muhammadur Rasoolullah’ and no more jhagra.

CM jee I absolutely dont mean to humiliate you or trying to spread revulsion. I heartily apologize if my posts have offended you. My only purpose is to show you the real picture of your original faith, which like other religions also couldn’t escape the hands decay or so called distorted with the passage of time. Its written on walls, the key figures are the main culprits of destroying ones faith. Like the sacred book of Taoism says “get rid of your preachers and discard your teachers, and the people will benefit a thousand times”. Its so true that we prefer to follow our leaders and spare our intellectual abilities to rectify the pitfalls made by the time.

Bhra CM you can call whatever you like “poking nose” or “@$$(&%#~”, your choice, but just to tell you that’s all part of my business - escorting the truth. You should be thankful to Nanak jee that he has shown you the light otherwise you would still be prostrating before COWS and TREES. Being an Ahmadi, now it’s my turn to further uplift you. If you want to obscure yourself like others and call my message as “HATRED” – fine. There is no compulsion in religion. All I can do is to pray for you.

I thought you were an open listener and a virtuous person, but you even dont know anything about your faith. My dear, faith is something to be reverend with whole heart and soul, LOVE it or LEAVE it, there is no such thing as pathetics.

Its not the only chola I am emphasizing, I am trying to substantiate that Guru jee was a pious Muslim, and of course I have to support whatever I am saying, otherwise you are gonna label me as a storyteller or something like that.

My dear, culture and religion are two different things, don’t mix it, wearing a turban or a particular stuff doesn’t connote a religion. It is so sad that you compared your spiritual cloak with a commercial Nike T-shirt. How fair of you. Even tell me why you prefer to wear a Nike T-shirt while a plain shirt of similar value can serve the same purpose. What exactly you mean to wear that shirt?. There are only two reasons, either you don’t have any choice or you love that status symbol. Consider the same reason for Nanak’s choice. He wore that robe all his life, certainly he knew the meaning written on it and agrees with it, after all he spent a significant part of his life with personalities like baba Farid, bahi Mardana, Nawab Daulat Khan and other great Muslims scholars. Just for example the chola says ‘Nothing deserves to be worshipped besides Allah, and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.’ Accepting this only statement is enough to testify him as a Muslim. (see last pic)

May be you don’t know its importance but for sure your ancestors must knew it. On account of its high repute and sanctity among your community, the practice had become common from the very earliest times of offering to it coverings by Rajas, great Rais and by famous men among the Sikhs who worshipped it and sought blessings from it. Ask your grand parents may be they know better, or visit Dera Nanak for more info.

In response to my question (“where can I find his claim that he was a SIKH and he founded SIKH RELIGION”)) you mentioned that “Of course I am sure he did not declare and shout aloud and make any claims…he was a very humble man”. While on the other hand you “claim” that Sikhism is a separate religion. I am confused, He did’nt claim ‘anything’ but his followers claim ‘everything’.

CM bahi, I would like to ask you here.. what is his religion??
While taking a birds eye-view on religions the following questions comes in mind.

**TO CLAIM A SEPERATE RELIGION,

· One must be appointed by Allah (is he appointed by Allah?)
· The appointee is termed as a PROPHET (did he claim that he was a Prophet or something parallel?)
· A book is given to him to guide future generations (is Garanth a divine book?)
· A prophet is assigned a TASK to accomplish (what exactly was his task?)
· A prophet is all alone, on the other hand has lots of opponents (what opposition he faced?)
· The need of new religion comes when the existing ones are totally deformed and have no spirituality left. Meaning the new religion is a one step higher in its spiritual teachings (which religion he meant to replace ?)
· What greatness it possess over Islam that one should be reverted to Sikhism? Or in other words What are your motives of preaching? **

Please answer any one with reference to Guru Nanak.

Now before closing this thread, I must reply your allegations. And leave the decision on you.

more to come … wait

[This message has been edited by Zalim (edited March 11, 2000).]

11

we cant say sikhism as of today is
a branch of Islam but that what one of our mission is, make it a part of it.<<<

In my first post to your reply, I took it jokingly and basically avoided the conversation. Main reasons for that, I am not knowledgeable enough to say anything on any religion including my own and not very eloquent at putting forward my thougths. You on the other hand suppose that every follower of any a religion has all the facts about that religion on finger tips....look around yourself and you will find the falsy in that assumption.
I may not know a alif bay of Sikhism, but that does not mean that I have to convert to your faith because you have all your facts and figures on your finger tips. To believe in what I belive is my borht right.

I finally answered some of your questions with logic and common sense....but you refuse to accept anything else but what you know as the only and absolute truth.

Your above statement in bold, I find the peak of the bigotry and arrogance. You expect me to be open minded and share my views and on the other hand you have all ready made up your mind that Nanak was a Muslim and hence all Sikhs need to come to the fold of your religion. I saw the arrogance and your pre-conceived hatred towards Sikhism in your first post but did not expect that you will come out that stonog and full of false pride and outrightly condemn the very existence and right to exist of another religion and proclaim that your mission is to convert them back to your faith.

I have been around muslim forums for a while now and always been friendly and keen to learn and build our friendships on our similarities but you are my biggest disappointment in this regard.

You absolutely deny the existence of my religion(and all your discussions and arguments are not to find truth but to support your decision) and here I am trying to build bridges of friendship....huh. What a joke.

your definiton of a separate religion is exactly that, your definition. I will say take off your glasses of false pride, bigotry and hatred towards other faiths and concentrate on your own faith and God.

Your makhauta of showing respect towards Nanak is off and your real motive is very clear to me. Your intolerance towards anything that is different than your faith is very clear to me.

I was willing to share my personal views on the subject after Naik's post(kind of mehna) but I hope she does not agree with your views in the above staement which seems the drive behind your mission of life.

Now that you have declared your mission openly, I don;t feel even the need to share my views with you.

But since you are a bigot and thats the only language you understand. Tell me, before you work on your mission to convert Sikhs to your faith, what are you doing to bring your own faith(Qadiani) into the fold of Islam? why don't you first finish that mission and know your real worth?

CM

ps: Although I am disappointed by your and some other people's views and attitudes towards other faiths and religions, I still believe that majority of muslims believe in tolerance towards other faiths and the concept of peaceful co-exitence.

ps1: Nothing could have upset me but your declaration of your mission to annihilate other faiths. I can admit my lack of knowledge to argue on something or other...but I will any day refuse your mission statement.

12

CM, this is not the only time I mentioned, but I have said it repeatedly that My purpose is to correct the false beliefs of people which can be argued by reasons. I am not a perfect person; I learn so many good thing and correct my missteps through these forums. One must have ability to understand and tolerance. Unless and until I don’t know your religion I cant argue on it. And in order to support my statement I have to prove it through your books and your scholars, because my reference holds no position in your analysis.

And of course, Islam is the most pious and last of all religions. My Holy Prophet(peace be upon him) invited kings and nations towards this noble religion, so what if I am inviting you towards Islam.

If your faith fails to holds this concept of preaching on the basis of logic, than don’t blame other for that. My religion don’t promote revulsion, its a religion of peace and harmony. I am sorry my post presented it in a different way. But for that you have to blame me, not my faith. I humble apologize.

I think, you either gave up with the discussion or you are trying to find an escape door. Mind you one thing my religion says that the “there is no compulsion in religion”, you read every thing but forget to read this line. Alas! you are open-minded. I haven’t said anywhere forcibly or sarcastically to accept Islam. I am only arguing on reasons.

Sir, This is not a winning situation. My only and only purpose is to educate you, show your errors, and if your intellectual capacity accepts it, discuss it to a conclusion. There should be a purpose for everything. Purposeless tasks are vain.

And there is no need to get upset. I should like to draw the attention to all Sikh brothers and sisters to the fact that when you claim someone to be belonging to your faith, it is not an insult. It is in fact an honor. It means that you love that person so much, you revere him, that you would rather have him among you rather than against you and out side your faith.

In this regard founder of my community says; I am told by Almighty God that Guru Baba Nanak was a holy man and as such he must be revered. Anyone who speaks any word in dishonor of Guru Baba Nanak will be cast out from among those who fear Allah

Similarly, late learned Sikh Sardar Gobind Singh Jee wrote; *** "if Muslims regard Pir Nanak as a Muslim none of us should get annoyed because this is an hounor to our Guru Nanak, his gratification and admiration. Guru Nanak belongs to the Muslims first and then to us. More over there were only two major nations at the time of Guru Nanak Ji. Hindus and Muslims. Khalsa Panth appeard only after two hundered years.*** (Haqiqai Sacho Sach 72)

Thats only a discussion. I am arguing on what I have learned, but you took a different color. Anyways. I have to answer your allegation.

Thankyou.

13

Zalim... >>We have a task to accomplish and that to GATHER EVERYONE UNDER ONE ROOF, “the roof of Holy Prophet”(sa) to whom your Nanak Sahab also cherished all his life. For now I am just trying to unveil your faith through the knowledge I have attained. I can debate on you till end, only if are not rigid and have ample proofs to justify your side. <<

Well in that case Guru Nanak failed miserably, as nobody but Ahmadies perhaps follow his teachings or doings. Are you prepared to call every sikh a Muslim now? They are his followers and proudly call themselves Sikhs. I have a CD, called Gurbani, and it is most authentic about Sikhs religion and it practicies and all of its Gurus, including the one who started all this, ie Guru Nanak. There is no mention of any chola. I have many sikh friends here who are gurudowara leaders and they have not heard any such thing as his chola. So I dont mean to be rude, but this is concoction. It is a hoax.

The founder of the Ahmadiyya Community said that I am told by Almighty God that Guru Baba Nanak was a holy man and as such he must be revered. Anyone who speaks any word in dishonor of Guru Baba Nanak will be cast out from among those who fear Allah and he based this claim on some evidence found in the Sikh literature and Sikh traditions. <<

By double talk like this your leader promoted the confusion in the millat. Just by saying a word of dishonor to Guru Nanak, how can one be out of the folds of Islam?? And then you people accuse Muslims for casting Ahmadies out of Islam, whereas you and your leaders have paved the way for hypocrites and imposters and fasle caliment to Apostleship. I am sure you are aware of another Qadiani leader made the following bold claim:

"just like the former Islam without Ahmadiyat, that is, the Islam that remains without Hazrat Mirza Sahib, is a dry Islam, so isthe Mecca haj a dry hau without this Haj because in these days the objectives of Haj are not fulfilled there. "
(The Daily Paigahm e Sulha, Lahore, Vol XXI# 22)

look Zalim! stop praising your leader and eulogising Guru Nanak and his nobility and holiness. You reject the history of Islam and allow yourself to be bewitched by incidents which are nothing but hypocrisy.

14

BayKhatr, aadab !

1. First I would like to ask, how do you say he failed? Do you have any proof aside that authentic CD?. Indeed we are not claiming all the sikhs as Muslim, they distorted the figure of their follower, deliberately or politically that is beside the point. They call themselves Sikh or Nanak Jee as Sikh, that is up to them, my concern over here is only to prove that Nanak Sahab was a pious Muslim of Sufic nature.

That’s why I started the topic with the intention that I can show all those who disgrace him as Hindu in disguise, and all those who consider him as a founder of separate religion, the actual facts. I scanned some pictures of his cloak from my collection, which I presume you didn’t noticed. These pictures clearly show the chola which Nanak ji use to wear. But unfortunately your CD didnt mentioned it. If you have any doubts or you were unable to read the pictures clearly than I can only say, please visit Daira Baba Nanak in Hushiarpur District, India. Being a Muslim, right away declaring anything a concoction or hoax is very unjust. Kissi cheez ki tahqeeq keáy bagair, ilzaam lagana aap ko zeb nahin dayta.

My dear, if you take a look at religions you will come to know that every religion is pure at its origin, its the killer time and the leaders which diverts and distorts the teachings by additions and reshufflings (as also mentioned by CM that their Granth follows a cascade of rearrangements over the past 600 years). Though that was not their motives at first place, but in the long run eventually the followers get dispersed from the original theme. Just take a look at great religions, Judaism, Christianity or Islam, there is no need to say how many offshoots still exists, and especially in Islam, who claims that they have a final and original words of Allah, yet have so many twigs, thats amazing, isn’t?. And we are comparing a 1400 years old Islam with a 600 years old Sikhism.

As I have cited above that it was political move of their Fifth guru to segregate Nanak’s followers from Muslims and form a separate entity. What are the circumstances, there was a pressure from Muslim monarch or conspiracies, we don’t know, but if we take a keen look at Nanak’s pious personality, it is very evident that he possesses a true Muslim color than a Hindu tint.

A well known Sikh scholar Dr. Surinder Singh Ph.D expressed his ideas like this:

"The originality of any biography depends upon its presentation of the true picture of the happenings and events of that time. From this biographical point of view every scholar has been treating Baba Nanak Ji with injustice. A modern scholar begins the biography of Guru Nanak Ji by saying that Guru Nanak Ji was the first Guru of the Sikhs and was the founder of the Sikh religion. To describe, him however as the founder of Sikhism is to pin point the limitations of his personality and this is not the quality of an expert biographer." (Sach Di khoji about Guru Nanak Ji)

The above quotation by Dr. Surinder Singh Ji needs no comments and it proves two points:
(1) To describe Guru Nanak Ji as the first Guru of Sikhism and its founder is injustice to him.
(2) That it is not the characteristic of an expert biographer to begin Guru Nanak's history by saying that he was the founder of Sikhism.

The Doctor has quoted two points in favor of the above mentioned facts:

(1) The literature that gave the Sikh religion a distinct appearance from others has doubtlessly been an addition after the death of Guru Nanak Ji. (Sach Di Khoji p] 16)

(2) There is also no doubt in that it is the Sikh religion that owned Guru Nanak Ji and adopted his sayings more than any other religion but the origin of Sikhism of today is not from the Guru. Hence it is an established fact that the Sikh literature that is separating it from other religions was an addition after the death of Guru Nakak Ji with which he has no connection nor can he be held historically responsible in any way.

Therefore the creeds that did not exist during the days of Guru Nanak Ji could neither be preached nor practiced by him.

Dr. Surinder Singh Ji has further commented in this connection that the Sikhs quoted the sayings of Guru Nanak Ji more than of any body else but they did not pay much attention in putting those sayings into practice. The Doctor has given two examples based on this reality:

(1) Sikhism of today did not originate from Guru Nanak Ji.

(2) It is true that it is a very difficult problem to find out facts about the life of Guru Nanak Ji of history but there is no problem to find out the historical image of the Guru. A study of his speeches in the Guru Granth Sahib depicts it thoroughly. Millions of people keep on reciting his anecdotes at rituals. Perhaps, no one has ever studied his speeches from the view point of finding out his true image. That is why Guru Nanak in whom we are believing to day is the Guru Nanak of Sikh story tellers and not the Guru Nanak of Guru bani. (Sach Di Khoj 10)

It is clear from the above that the image of Guru Nanak Ji derived from his speeches by Sikh brothers has no connection and relation with the real Guru Nanak. That is the image created by storytellers, which is quite in contrast with that of Gurubani. A scholar writes about the pictures of the supposed Guru Nanak Ji that are being prepared these days:

"We have disfigured the picture of Guru Nanak Ji. We have absolutely changed the pictures that existed forty years ago. We do not know what is the conspiracy behind it. It is not impossible that even the name of Guru Ji may be changed in the pictures in the future i.e. they may start to write Guru Nanak Dev Ji instead of GuKu Nanak Ji." (Rasala Sant Siasi Amritsar August 1963)

A cursory glance at the pictures of Guru Ji, currently in circulation, will show that they have been changed using five Ks (which is coined some 200 years later by the 10th successor-Guru Gobind Singh) and the name also start to appear as Nanak Dev Singh. May Allah save Nanak Ji from such people!.

On the other hand Dr. Terlochan Singh Ji said:

(1)"Guru Nanak Ji believed in the Muslim article of Unity of God." (Jivan Charitar Guru Nanak Dev 307)

(2) Guru Nanak Ji believed that Mohammad (peace be upon him) was the choicest prophet of God.(Jivan Charitar Guru Nanak Dev 305)

Early traditions of Nanak are preserved in the Sákhis or traditional stories, while his sayings have been collected in the Granth, and it is chiefly from these two sources that information as to the religion of Nanak is sought. But the evidence from both these sources is not so trustworthy as to be accepted without limitation. The Granth did not come into existence in the form of a written collection until after the Sikh community had assumed the attitude of a political movement directed against the authority of the Muslim monarchs and gradually drifted into the old Hinduism, which the Founder himself had renounced. As Mr. Pincott says;

"Guru Arjan, the fifth Guru, was an active and ambitious man. He laid aside the dress of a faqir which had been worn by all his predecessors and converted the voluntary offerings of his disciples into a tax. This raised him to some importance, and enabled him to take men into his pay, a proceeding which conferred additional dignity upon him, and, at the same time, intensified the jealousy of his Muhammadan neighbours. As an additional means of uniting his community into one compact body, he collected the words of Nanak, and those of other saintly personages into a book, which he called Granth, i.e., the book, and strictly enjoined his followers to accept no speech as authoritative which was not contained in the book."

The circumstances under which the Granth was collected clearly show that the object of Guru Arjan was to separate Sikhism from Islam. At any rate, a split having already been caused, the collector must have taken the greatest precaution to exclude all sayings from the collection, which clearly favored Islam. And as all sayings which he did not admit into the collection were to be treated as in authoritative, it was natural that they should have soon been forgotten. It must, moreover, be remembered that the words of Nanak were transmitted orally for nearly three-quarters of a century, and, therefore, with the change of the Sikh attitude towards Islam, imperceptible change must have been brought about in the words of Nanak, and as the long course of oral transmission cannot be expected to have preserved the sayings in their pristine purity, the changes from time to time must have been in accordance with the growing tendency of Sikhism.

THE ATTITUDE OF NANAK TOWARDS QURAN AND OTHER MUSLIM FAITHS

Let me give you a brief example of his inclination and devotion towards Islam.

As regards the Holy Quran, the attitude of Nanak towards this book was always respectful and he enjoined the reciting of the Holy Quran and the saying of prayers in accordance with the Muslim faith. Consider the following verses of the Granth which are taken from Trumpp's translation as given in Hugh's Dictionary of Islam:

"Then thou art a Mulla, then thou are a Qazi, if thou knowest the name of God (Khuda).
"None, though he be very learned, will remain, he hurries onwards.
"He is a Qazi by whom his own self is abandoned, and the One Name is made His support.
"He is, and will be, He will not be destroyed, true is the Creator.
"Five times he prays (Niwaj gujarhi), he reads the book of the Quran.
(Translation, page 37).

In these verses the reading of the Quran, the saying of the five daily prayers, and entire submission of oneself to God which is THE LITERAL SIGNIFICANCE OF ISLAM, are strictly enjoined as the true way to salvation. On another occasion we have in the Granth: "Pirs, Prophets, Saliks, Sadiqs, Martyrs, Shaikhs, Mullas and Darvishes; blessings will come to those who constantly recite DARUD". The true meaning of darud is "invoking the blessings of God upon the Holy Prophet Muhammad" as the Muslims are commanded to do in the Holy Quran and the traditions of the Holy Prophet. Hence the verse means that of all the righteous men "blessings will come to those who continually pray for the blessings of God upon the Holy Prophet Muhammad"; in other words Divine blessings cannot be granted to any person who is not a follower of the Holy Prophet of Islam. These are clear evidences of Nanak's profession of Islam and his renunciation of Hinduism.

The traditions of Nanak preserved in the Janam Sakhi, are full of evidences of his alliance with Muhammadanism. Nanak was an employee in the service of Nawab Daulat Khan when he first felt a call to a religious duty. His interview with his master after the inspiration is thus described in the Janam Sikhi. The Nawab sent for Nanak and the latter replied; "'Hear, 0 Nawab, when I was thy servant, I came before thee; now I am not thy servant; now I am become the servant of Khuda'. The Nawab said: 'Sir, (if) you have become such, then come with me and say prayers (Niwaj or Namaz). It is Friday.' Nanak said: 'Go, Sir.' The Nawab, with the Qazi and Nanak, and a great concourse of people went into the Jami Masjid and stood there. All the people who came into the Masjid began to say, 'To-day Nanak has entered this sect!' There was a commotion among the respectable Hindus in Sultanpur; and Jairam, being much grieved, returned home. Nanaki (Nanak's sister) perceiving that her husband came home dejected, rose up and said, 'Why it is that you are to-day so grieved?' Jairam replied, 'Listen, 0 servant of Paramesur (God), what has thy brother Nanak done! He has gone with the Nawab into the Jami'Masjid to pray; and in the city, there is an outcry among the Hindus and Musalmans that Nanak has become a Turk (Muslim) to-day' (India Office manuscript, No. 2885, fol. 39)" (Hugh's Dictionary, page 586).

Baykhatr bahi, It should be borne in mind that the proof Nanak gave of his having become a servant of God was not by going to a Hindu temple, but by joining a Muslim public service in a mosque; and therefore even if he may not have become a thorough convert to Islam at this early stage, he had no respect for Hindu forms of worship. After this we find Nanak assuming the garb of Muslim faqirs (not of Hindu Sddhus) and seeking their company, living and conversing with them freely. We find him openly giving and receiving Muhammadan forms of salutation, and giving his assent to being called a “Darwesh”. Among the Muslim Sufis he seems to be quite at home, while the Hindus missed in him every mark of being a Hindu, as the story of Nanak's journey to Benares shows. After these events, Nanak remained for full twelve years in the company of Baba Shaikh Farid(ra), a famous Muslim saint, and at this time he seems to have been thoroughly converted to Islam, even if he had before this any predilection for Hinduism.

I want to write more, but I know you are now getting irritated with this long post. Still if you want more evidences, I will be glad to provide it.

2. Secondly, you quote Anyone who speaks any word in dishonor of Guru Baba Nanak will be cast out from among those who fear Allah <---- whats wrong with this statement? does God Fearing only means ISLAM? It is a general statement for those who accuse Nanak Sahab as an untruthful man. Just browse through the previous threads and you will see what forum friends say about him. This is a very strong statement in favor of Nanak Jee, that he was a Pious Person, labeling him a dishonest person is very unjust.

"Our opinion about Baba Nanak is that he was surely a true Muslim. He was certainly unimpressed by the Vedas. After having believed in the Kalima Tayyeba he had undergone a spiritual change in his life which cannot he conceived Without following the Holy Prophet." ( Sat Bachan 31)

We, Ahmadi Muslims all over the world sincerely regard the real Guru Nanak Ji as a sage and one of us and will continue to own him till the last breath of our life. We have no concern with the imaginary Nanak Ji that the Sikhs are presenting to the world.

In view of the above discussion, I think I have justified the quote. He was a Muslim, and anyone who dont consider him as a Musalmaan is one who don’t fear Allah. BAYKHATR jee, khuda ka kuch khauf kero, read again if you don’t understand what he really means.

Religiously speaking, You cant judge the personality by his followers. Do you pretend like Holy Prophet(sa)?

Again referring to Sikhism, Here is a point for the scholars to ponder over. The pictures of the Nanak Ji previously prepared by Sikh artists did not show him in the form of Sikh, equipped with the five K’s. Dr. Surrinder Singh also admits that the pictures of Guru Nanak Jee were prepared in the form of a Muslim bard as he said;

“In the old pictures Guru Nanak Ji appears as a Muslim sage”. (Sach di Khoj 59, 128)

3. Finally, in the end you cited a quote, I haven’t read it though, apparently it is evident that motives of not only Hajj but all the worships has gradually faded. In short the so-called element of "roohaniat"- spirituality is almost washed-out. Moreover if you want to discuss my beliefs, you are most welcome to open another thread, this thread is only dedicated to Sikhism..

I am sorry to say, its absolutely unfair to pass remarks with out any authenticity.

This is only a debate, no need to get annoyed or frustrated. You raised a issue, I deemed it incorrect and supported my statement. If you think my account is wrong, please correct me. Creating a rift is not the solution; it will take us further down the hill.

Thankyou.

[This message has been edited by Zalim (edited March 12, 2000).]

15

Zalim,

I have tried to stay away from this discussion because we had already discussed Sikhism at length on this forum and if you really wanted add to your knowledge about Sikhism you could have easily read the past threads.

As I already perceived your agenda was not add to your knowledge you wrote

TO CLAIM A SEPERATE RELIGION,
· One must be appointed by Allah (is he appointed by Allah?)
· The appointee is termed as a PROPHET (did he claim that he was a Prophet or something parallel?)
· A book is given to him to guide future generations (is Garanth a divine book?)
· A prophet is assigned a TASK to accomplish (what exactly was his task?)
· A prophet is all alone, on the other hand has lots of opponents (what opposition he faced?)
· The need of new religion comes when the existing ones are totally deformed and have no spirituality left. Meaning the new religion is a one step higher in its spiritual teachings (which religion he meant to replace ?)
· What greatness it possess over Islam that one should be reverted to Sikhism? Or in other words What are your motives of preaching?

Eastern religions don’t believe in the concept of Prophet (God choose one special person to talk to human beings), but they believe in finding God or gaining more knowledge about spirituality and ways to lead more fulfilling life with the help of a teacher. Secondly Sikhism believes in reincarnation and becoming one with God and Karma (you reap what you sow) concept which is very different then the judgement day concept believed by Middle Eastern religion. The is a very big fundamental difference and makes Sikhism very different than Islam.

Guru Nanak when asked whether he was Hindu or Muslim replied

"Hindu kahai to Mariya Musalmaan Mai Naahi
Panch taat ka Putlaa Nanak Mera Nau."

(If I call myself Hindu you will beat me and I am not a muslim but I am made of five elements and Nanak is my name)

The criteria to start a new religion as described by you is based on your religion and in no way acceptable and applicable to others outside your faith. Sikhs feel very privileged to follow a religion which teaches us to respect for all mankind that God can be found by many way (unlike Islam which believes in path to God is only through Muhammad) and it is more important to be a good human being then follow any particular religion or perform meaningless rituals.

There are fundamental differences in teaching of Sikhism and Islam you are trying to ignore them and concentrating on the painter's perception of looks and clothes to justify your preconcieved notions which in Sikhism do not count or convey any message.

CM,
You have done a very good job of explaining Sikhism and agree with all of your assertion.

[This message has been edited by Rani (edited March 12, 2000).]

[This message has been edited by Rani (edited March 12, 2000).]

16

Zalim, Again Read my first post in this thread. I didnot want to argue on teh subject. I still don't. Where I adiore your rspect for Guru Nanak, I also find that you are on a compaign of your own and well equiped for that. I find plenty of holes in your arguemtns but don't have the time, knowledge and energy to gather the material to counter argue that. It does not mean that you are proven right just because I don't have the intellect or interest to counter argue.

"Nanak
remained for full twelve years in the company of Baba Shaikh Farid(ra), a famous Muslim
saint, and at this time he seems to have been thoroughly converted to Islam, even if he had
before this any predilection for Hinduism."

Baba Shaikh Farid was born in 1189 and Nanak in 1439. I am not sure how he was able to spend 12 years with him. But again you will find and say anything to support your beleif that Nanak was a Muslim.

Nanak himself has said "na hum Hindu na Musalman, Allah Ram ke pinD paraan" He clearly denied being either but shows respect to both Allah and Ram. You interested in what people after him said than what he himself said.

  • "Our opinion about Baba Nanak is that he was surely a true Muslim. He was certainly unimpressed by the Vedas. After having believed in the Kalima Tayyeba he had undergone a spiritual change in his life which cannot he conceived Without following the Holy Prophet."

You can have any opinions and say since he was not X he was Y. That does not make it truth.

You are picking pieces here and there and trying to make your story line complete. Good luck with that.

If you are interested in claiming Nanak being a Muslim and showing respect to him, I have no problem with that. Lot of Hindus believe he was a Hindu. Thats your belief.

Guru Nanak by giving the Guru ship to his successor established a spiritual lineage which continued untill the 10t Guru. Sikhs believe(and there are plenty of refernces to it in Gurbani) that same joat(soul) existed in all the Gurus. In fact I have heard preachers refering Gurus as Nanak dooja, nanak teeja etc contrary to your claim that Sikhs are calling Guru Nanak Dev as Nanak Singh. No one have done it and no one will dare to do it. Sikhism developed over 3 centuries from Nanak to Gobind Singh's time. It was not a cook-book style recipe revealed overnight.

I don't know what paintings of Guru Nanak are your looking at but most I have seen(and best so far by Sobha Singh) does not show 5 K's on it. Most fakir( be they Hindu or Muslims of the time) used to have longer beards and wearing a cloth on the head is a Punjabi traditon even long before Nanak. Untill few decades back, most Punjabis(Hindu, Sikh and MUslims) used to wear turban at the time of their wedings. The turban and long beard is show in Nanak's paintings which is probably more close to his true appearance.

Gurbani, including Nanak's condemns any type of worship to paintings and stuff, so these paintings are not considered authentic and given any importance anyways by SIkh theologians and researchers.

Again, your arguemnts go more on the line of,.... our opnion is...Nanak appeared to be sage...etc. kaawaN de aakhay Dhaggay nai marde. You can wish anything.

Thats all I am going to say on the subject.

Again my apologies that I proved to not knowledgeable enough to refute your claims and take a head on fight and prove a good debater. but that what I am. I respect your right to prove any way you could that your belief is the correct one. You keep going and going and I won't stop you.

There are not many Sikhs on this forum to argue on the subject either. Some like me are not knowledgeable enough while others are too busy defending BJP and RSS.

Take care.

CM

17

There's no reason to defend the BJP or the RSS. Like everyone else, they have a right to their views. There's nothing wrong with the RSS views as long as they donot impose those views on others.

18

Bombaykid, I wrote last line to check if you are reading this thread or not...so you were;-)

CM

19

CM -- it is an interesting thread, so I was reading it. I read about religion although i am not an expert on it by any standards, so I don't give my opinion on it...I'd rather leave it to the resident experts in here. ;)
In any case, if you think I'm one of the pro RSS guys, I'm not ! I just like to listen to both sides before forming an opinion. Although I am a big fan of V.D. Savarkar !

20

Bombaykid,

I have heard that V.D. Savakar looked upon Guru Govind Singh as his hero and wrote quite a bit on him and Sikhism, when he was in jail but unfortunately the writings got lost. I think Gandhi views regarding him were not very complimentary.

I like to read more about V.D. Savakar, please post if you have something on him.

[This message has been edited by Rani (edited March 13, 2000).]