ਇਹ ਜੱਗ ਮਿੱਠਾ ਅਗਲਾ ਕੀਹਨੇ ਡਿੱਠਾ - “ਜੇ ਮਰਨ ਤੋਂ ਬਾਅਦ ਹੀ ਰਬ ਦੇ ਚਰਨਾਂ ਵਿੱਚ ਨਿਵਾਸ ਥਾਂ ਮਿਲਦਾ ਹੈ, ਤਾਂ ਫਿਰ ਇਸ ਸੰਸਾਰ ਵਿਚ ਸਾਨੂੰ ਸਮਾਂ ਖਰਾਬ ਕਰਨ ਦੀ ਕੀ ਲੋੜ ਹੈ ?”

This was a great rebuttal Bhai Jasjit Singh Jeo. We need more knowledgeable Singhs like you and Bhai Kulbir Singh Jeo to write such articles. It looks like to me that Mr Madrasa is an atheist. They question everything that is authentically Gurmat especially mystical matters like Naam, Dasam Duar, Anhad Shabad, Amritvela. They interpret Gurbani not according to the Gurus wisdom but according to atheism. That is why they do Anarth when doing Arths of Gurbani. If you tell them that Gurbani mentions what happens after death, they say it is just 'metaphor'. In fact this is their answer for anything where their atheist philosophy does not match what is clearly written and mentioned in Gurbani.

I feel sorry for them that they have been blessed with Sikhi in this lifetime, but they waste it in Atheist activities. The worst thing is they are under the wrong impression that they are correct and as a result are spreading their atheism to other Sikhs. Since the last 15-20 years such atheist vichaardhara is on the rise. They have written books, have entire websites devoted to such vichaardhara. They look like Sikhs with Dastars and Darha but the words that come out of their mouths is pure atheism.

This is kala afghanaism in practice now.Entire missionary katha vachak group preach this be it ghagha,dhundha,panthpreet,jeonwla etc.
They do it in a clever way.

Recently Dhundha was In california and when some singhs asked him some questions he cleverly deflected those.He uses body language to divert topic

Please watch this

[www.youtube.com]

Bahut khoob, Bhai Jasjit Singh jeeo! The ones who deny the next world, also deny the teachings of Gurmat. If there is no next world, then there is no Vaheguru either because this world is a khel (play) of Vaheguru and there has to be a world, beyond this khel. To think that the body made up of water, earth, air, fire etc. can think and possess intelligence is to deny the existence of Aatma.

Kulbir Singh

If they say that concepts like parlok is not real that it must be a metaphor, then what is it a metaphor for? If it's not a metaphor, then they are saying that bani lies.

These people, as is evident from video, preach that they believe what they see. In other words they are at physical level,
believe only what they can see with their eyes.


God realization is at a higher level what we call spiritualism or domain of spirit. That stage is reached by Naam simran and naam simran only.They
do not believe in Naam simran.

Then they also talk about God.How they know there is God. They have not seen God. One side they say believe what you see and at sametime they talk about God.These people are a sham, misleading ignorant and innocent sikhs by body language.This is an attack on a minority religion and they are being used as a medium.

This site should make a collection of such articles. This article(about Parlok) along with the rebuttal written by Bhai Joginder Singh Talwara Jee about Dasam Dwar posted here by Bhai Jasjit Singh Jeo, and about 2 or 3 months ago I read very good articles in Soora written by Bhai Kulbir Singh Jeo about Naam Simran in response to missionary objections. All of these articles should be collected under this site so people can read them. When I see Singh Sabha Canada and other such sites, they have so many articles that are available to misguide Sangat about Naam Simran and spiritual matters of Sikhi all in one place. As a result now there are so many people(even Amritdharis) who say what is the need to repeat Naam or that Dasam Dwar is simply the brain and that there is no such thing as Dharam Rai, Chitar Gupt, Jamdoots who are clearly mentioned to exist all over Gurbani. When you say these entities are mentioned in gurbani they say it is only Metaphor and even call it Brahminvaad. Some like this missionary Parcharak makes fun of these entities and says there is no such thing as Chitar Gupt, Jamdoots, Nark and even do Makhaul(fun) of this.

[www.youtube.com]

In this he is saying Jamdoot is metaphor for kaam krodh lobh moh and hankaar. They make fun of the concept of reincarnation and say no such thing either. What can you say to such parcharaks who will not change their views even when presented with facts from Gurbani. At least we should have these articles all available here in the literature section so average people who don't know can be saved from this atheist Koorh Parchar.

Nimana jio, agree that there should for a pool of articles somewhere on the internet in Gurmukhi and English to counter the false propaganda being progated by anti Gurmat elements.

Most of articles can be taken from Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh Jee books, bit revised according to today's need.

JASJIT SINGH Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Nimana jio, agree that there should for a pool of
> articles somewhere on the internet in Gurmukhi and
> English to counter the false propaganda being
> progated by anti Gurmat elements.
>
> Most of articles can be taken from Bhai Sahib
> Randhir Singh Jee books, bit revised according to
> today's need.

Bhai Sahib Randhir Singh Jee's writings are a treasure of Gurmat related wisdom. When one reads Gurmat Naam Abhyas Kamai, it leaves no doubt Naam Simran is a central commandment of Sikhi. Andhiti Dunya leaves no doubt bout concepts like court of Dharam Rai, Jamdoots, Nark etc. Anhad Shabd Dasam Dwar another great book about Sikh spiritual concepts.

I just don't understand, we all accept Gurbani as truth. If something is clearly mentioned in Gurbani still how can some Sikhs (missionaries) deny it's validity and just write something off and say it is metaphor when our views don't agree with Gurbani. It's really perplexing when you have such a situation. Otherwise when I see missionaries, I think they could do so much good for the Panth since they think rationally. But they have taken such rationality to the extreme. For a Sikh Gurbani should be interpreted according to Guru's wisdom not atheism and such atheistic driven rational.