I come from a gur-sikh family and when I was little my grandpa would read stories to me about the teachings, practices and lives of the Gurus. Growing up however I started becoming less and less religious; although, I think I have a considerable amount of knowledge pretaining to sikhism and other relegions. Despite the fact I think I "know" a lot about these relegions, I cant help but waiver between being agnostic and athiest (
, this has a lot to do with me taking science courses cuz my punjabi family wants me to become a doctor, so typical huh?). I know there's no real contradiction between sikhism and science but I think that there are some contradictions between the teachings, practices and lives of the gurus. For my example, I will cite from "SikhiWiki" which is a wikipedia like site dedicated to information on sikhism.
Example 1:
This is an anecdote from the early life of Guru Nanak Dev Ji
"Guru Nanak from an early age evidenced a questioning and enquiring mind. He soon mastered the Vedas and Sanskrit and was enrolled into a madrassa to study Persian and Arabic. Picking up both languages quickly, he surprised his teacher by composing an acrostic on the Persian language. When it was time for Nanak to be invested with the twice born thread the
“sacred” thread, called the Janeu, he refused to take part in the ritual. When the priest continued to insist that the young Nanak done the string he went into a trance and sang: Let mercy be the cotton, contentment the thread, Continence the knot and truth the twist. Oh priest! if you have such a thread, Do give it to me. It will not wear out, nor get soiled, nor be burnt, nor lost. Says Nanak, blessed are those who go about wearing such a thread." So basically, a young Nanak rejected the ritual thread of the Hindu priest and justified it by suggesting that a simple piece of thread cannot make you a true Hindu, it's almost "for show" instead a true Hindu or any "good person" in the eyes of god has all the good attributes within them (this is the interpretation I was told from my grandfather).
Now if you fast forward to the time of the Tenth Guru, Guru Gobind Singh Ji, becoming a true Sikh would require one to take amrit and keep the 5 K's, even though amrit in sikhism is symbolic for something that lays within you by the grace of god. Can it not be argued that the same thread Guru Nanak rejected was symbolic of the same idea? If in fact a piece of thread cannot make you a true hindu then surely Amrit and the 5 K's alone cannot make you a true sikh, but my question is whether or not they are even needed to be on the path toward God. If what is important is that which lies within you, then the external acts of drinking amrit and keeping the 5 K's are trivial? Can one reject amrit and the 5 K's for the same reason Guru Nanak rejected the thread? The priest in the story told Guru Nanak that a person would not be considered religous without this thread, and let's face it, Sikh's arent considered "relegious" unless they are amrit-shuk and display the 5 K's, yet Guru Nanak still rejected the ritual and Guru Gobind created a ritual. I view this as a contradictory practice. This also leads me to another example
Example 2
For this example ill paraphrase, if you actually want to read the evidence i suggest you google it (
) but im sure this is common knowledge to most of you. One of Guru Nanak's contribution to the world was the idea of a "Universal Message" that did not only apply to Hindu's but to Muslims as well and others too. When asked if he was either a Muslim or a Hindu he replied by saying "Neither" or by saying "both" and even as a baby, when a muslim priest visited his house and presented him with a jug of water (symbolizing islam) and a jug of milk (symbolizing hinduism) to see which one he would place his hand in, he put his hands in both. Having said this, if, hypothetically, guru nanak was alive today and someone were to ask him if he was a Muslim, Hindu or Sikh... would Guru Nanak still say he isnt any one of them? or all of them? I am aware our relegion does not suggest a muslim or hindu cannot achieve oneness with god, instead it suggests that anyone can do it, but I am afraid that by the simply creating "sikhism" this alienates alot of people. Personally im inclined to believe sikhism is more a way of life like Buddhism then a relegion in the same vein as Islam, Christianity or Hinduism but if a muslim can reach god and so can a hindu then of what importance are the 5 K's. If simply being the best person you can be, believing in god, and praying is enough then what purpose do the 5 K's have and Is that purpose ultimately trivial?
Anyways, im just trying to expand my knowledge so im lookin forward to reading replies from a different perspective as mine. Ive thought bout this issue alot so i even have my own answer for it, but it doesnt satisfy me so im hopin you guys can explain this matter to me :P.
- Gurinder