User talk:Rupinder.singh
Hello, Sat Sri Akal, Waheguru ji ka Khalsa, Waheguru ji ki Fateh, Namastae, Salaam, ਜੀ ਆਇਆਂ ਨੂੰ: Rupinder.singh Ji!
A very warm welcome from SikhiWiki and many thanks for your contribution so far to the article Martyrdom of Guru Arjan. Unfortunately, I have had to revert the changes as I cannot understand why you deleted the references to Hazrat Mian Mir's vision of supernatural things. Please see the text below for further explanation.
Having read the explanation below, I hope you will not consider this an inconsiderate act on my part. I hope you will bookmark this Sikhi site and keep visiting it on a regular basis. Also, you can help us enhance this site by checking it, amending it, by adding to it, by discussing issues on the discussion pages, etc. Please feel free to add to or amend any of the topics that you have knowledge about. Don't worry about making mistakes, as these can be easily corrected.
With Waheguru's kirpa, may you always remain in Chardi kala. Many thanks, Hari Singhtalk, {{{2}}}
Explanation about Sikhi and Supernatural Powers
You say in your comments that you "Removed [the] concept of Supernatural Powers of Mian Meer, and Guru Arjan Dev ji..." as "...It contradicts Gurmat".
Khalsa ji, supernatural powers are a reality and the vision that is described by Mian Mir is a possibility as can be seen from Gurbani at the link given below. Bani tells us that supernatural powers do exist and that they are a integral part of nature; Riddha and Siddha are a function of nature just like atomic power or gravity, powers of thought, etc.
However to strive or crave for these powers is "anti-Gurmat"; to use these powers for personal advantage is anti-gurmat. Please follow the link to read Gurbani lines containing the word "supernatural".
You will recall that Guru Nanak stopped a huge bolder at Panja Sahib in an act to save himself and the sangat from certain death. This is a supernatural act done by a Guru! Not for a personal gain and in self defence but nevertheless a supernatural act in any event.
I hope you will agree with my analysis of this issue and the related Gurbani; if not, please do revert back to me on my user talk page. Kind regards and many thanks again, Hari Singhtalk 22:51, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
labeling 'other' people
Rupinder.singh ji, I chanced to see the words Chinese whisper and wondered whether it was a slam on the chinese. Why not a persian whisper or and american whisper, ect. The name comes from a game - I have to wonder about the game designer's intentions in giving the gossip award to the chinese.
We could have the old saws of the Scotch miser game or the Dutch Stinginess game or the Welsh betting game or the Indian Giver game (maybe you never heard of the phrase (probably started by euro americans in reference to how much more trustworthy they were than american indians).
Seeing your name in red reminds me I have forgotten to say welcome to this site. I hope you will take a few moments to tell us a bit about yourself; country, interest, age, education, work, whatever. Any morsels that turns your name to blue - by adding info on your user page site. That site is usually never alter by anyone but you. We add comments and questions on our respective discussion (talk) pages.
I used to teach at a university here in the 'states (US) and on the first day of many of my design classes I would give out a letter size paper with an outline drawing of the USA. The first student was asked to redraw this and pass it on - each student doing the same. The final drawing proved the point of being accurate and careful in using language, ect. I believe this is what Martin Heidegger called drift. I guess this was long before someone decided to label the Chinese, with this tendency we all have.
Again welcome and please continue to contribute.
Raab Rakha, Allenwalla 16:15, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
see also:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chinese_whispers
i.e. - …The name "Chinese whispers" reflects the former stereotype in Europe of the Chinese language as being incomprehensible.[3] It is little-used in the United States and may be considered offensive.[4]…
supernatural vs
Your comments also led me to look up Chinese whispers (apparently an English Empire slam on the difficulties of understanding a language based, in part, on tones (good things the bush men of Africa never developed an empire for the British to conquer), which led to looking up Epistemology (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemology) and on to the so called Certainty series: (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Certainty)
- Agnosticism
- Belief
- Certainty
- Determinism
- Doubt
- Epistemology
- Justification
- Estimation
- Fallibilism
- Fatalism
- Nihilism
- Probability
- Solipsism
- Uncertainty
Or as Jeremy_Hilary_Boob (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremy_Hilary_Boob) said:
- "Ad hoc, ad loc and quid pro quo.
- So little time — so much to know!"
With so much to read, keeping to one's beliefs (such as its ok to kill those who don't believe in my religion in the exact same way I do - is ok) makes it easy to see why the taleban simply blow up schools.
I was trying to find a story I had read recently of a man who was astonished to hear his young nephew saying it was ok to have killed the Ahmadis in Lahore (as taught by his Maulvi), but i couldn't find the story again.
but the two stories found in the attempt should be interesting to any Sikh - given one of Guru Gobind Singh's raisons d'etre for creating the Khalsa and his father's reason for giving up his life.
Finally I found the story/letter
Regards Allenwalla 18:35, 4 June 2010 (UTC)
Bhai Sahib ji,
Many thanks for such a lot of work in preparing your very considered reply; I have transferred the whole discussion/our conversation on this topic to Talk:Supernatural_Powers as it is very relevant to the article there.
I agree that Sikhi is a very logical faith and that we do not follow meaningless rituals or logic. However, Bhai sahib that does not mean that we can restrict the issues to just what we understand or can see or visualise ourselves. One has to accept that there may be ideas and realities that some of us cannot understand or "see" but which may exist.
Just as an example, I could say to you that "a footballer is capable of scoring a goal by bending the ball from about 25 yards past 10 players" - You may say that you do not believe this statement. I could then show you a video of someone achieving this goal. Our perception of the world is linked to our experiences; there may be more to learn about the world then we know today. If I said in 1800 that man will be able to produce an atom bomb which could destroy a whole town - no one who have believed me. So some of the things that we may say today may not sound believable but they may be true.
Bhai sahib, as Sikhs we follow the Guru Granth Sahib; this tells us that supernatural powers do exist. I agree with you that the Guru does not give these any spiritual significance but they nevertheless do exist. This is clearly demonstrated in the meeting of Guru Nanak with the Siddhas when they tried their supernatural power on the Guru!
So as Sikhs we do not give these powers any significance but we must acknowledge that they do exist; to deny them would be anti-Gurmat. I will compare them to another concept which is very similar - ghosts.
Gurbani says that ghosts are a reality - However I have not seen a ghost and I am incapable of showing one to you. So how do we deal with this issue. Do we deny ghosts just because we cannot demonstrate their existence in a scientific way or do we believe/deny Gurbani or what?
Raab Rakha, Hari Singhtalk 22:50, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
