I note your implied message contained in the above and have nothing to discuss with you anything more, the posts objected to by you have been edited long back. You may know the things better.

I shall take up the issue with the members as and when the study is over though the details of the assembly are meaningless unless approved. Also it is meaningless if any Sikh signs or not as ultimately it is the supreme legislature/parliament that has to approve the constitution or to bring about any amendment. It is the quorum that matters and not a Sikh, howsoever, high or low position he may hold.

Be followed by your priorities.

__________________

~~~**Jap mun Satnaam sda Satnaam...sda satnaam sda satnaam.....~~~

Sikhs are not Hindus and this is a proven fact and is easily distinguished by the rest of the world

Yes, But Constitution Of India does not state so. India is the originator of Sikhi. The debate is in this light.
If sikhs are treated as Hindus by the constitution Of India it is logical that this would be the recognition given by the entire world. Everyone will look at this authentic Document to establish if sikhs are Hindus or otherwise.
Seems logical too.

__________________

~~~**Jap mun Satnaam sda Satnaam...sda satnaam sda satnaam.....~~~

Sikh 80 ji

All Sikhs are considered Hindus by the Indian Constitution

Maybe a little more clarification is needed for the average non-Indian reader -- both about the constitution and the practical application of this.

My understanding-- and no doubt it is flawed -- is that Sikhs are grouped with Hindus in consideration of minority/majority status when compared to scheduled classes (formerly known as untouchable castes). So the representation of Sikhs makes them members of majority classes along with Hindus for purposes of allocating governmental resources and political positions or placements in universities. But Sikhs are not condered Hindus per se. The census data for India still distinguishes Sikhs, Jains, Muslims, and so forth from Hindus.

This is a really confusing issue for most people who are not from India. Maybe you or someone else could go into more detail.

Thanks

__________________
ਮਨ ਕਰਹਲਾ ਗੁਰ ਗੋਵਿੰਦੁ ਸਮਾਲਿ ॥ man karehalaa gur govindh samaal O camel-like mind, dwell upon the Guru and the Lord of the Universe.

Obviously all the sikhs are to be treated as per the constitution. There is no specific benefit that may flow to sikhs for this. Sikhs have also backward classes [ Other Backward classes, here known as OBCs] and they get there reservations for the backward classes.

However, Sikhs, although in minority are not able to get any benefit for their being intrinsically minority in nature. But the minority status is not available to sikhs. Even the Muslims which may be 10 times the sikhs have this minority benefit to the extent that they get the 'Haj' subsidy for undertaking their Haz/pilgrimage from the tax payers money. Government Of India subsidises it.


I shall quote the following for the benefit of those interested. It is an Article 25 of constitution Of India and is self explanatory.

25. Freedom of conscience and free profession, practice and propagation of religion.-

(1) Subject to public order, morality and health and to the other provisions of this Part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion.

(2) Nothing in this article shall affect the operation of any existing law or prevent the State from making any law -

(a) regulating or restricting any economic, financial, political or other secular activity which may be associated with religious practice;

(b) providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus.

Explanation I.- The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion.

Explanation II.- In sub-clause (b) of clause reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly.


Had sikhs not been clubbed with Hindus they would have got the minority status and would have progressed a lot. But thanks to Sikh Leadership that was dormant for the last six decades and the credit for this goes to those sikhs as well who could not present their view points even though they had enough chance to do so. It is only a part of painful Sikh history.

Only leadership of that time i.e pre-and post independence has to take the onus. As stated by one of the members that there were sikhs included in the drafting of constitution but they preferred to not to get their view points recorded even in a vote of dissent and left the meetings without arguing and fighting for the rights of the sikhs.

M A Jinnah was a single Muslim who was instrumental for carving out Pakistan with his pen and type writer and could negotiate with the British Government , But sikhs were mostly under the inactive,weak and inefficient leadership.

Sikhs have therefore suffered a lot on account of the poor quality of leadership during the pre and post independence era.

__________________

~~~**Jap mun Satnaam sda Satnaam...sda satnaam sda satnaam.....~~~

Sikh 80 ji

When you said,

However, Sikhs, although in minority are not able to get any benefit for their being intrinsically minority in nature. But the minority status is not available to sikhs. Even the Muslims which may be 10 times the sikhs have this minority benefit to the extent that they get the 'Haj' subsidy for undertaking their Haz/pilgrimage from the tax payers money. Government Of India subsidises it.

In other words, Sikhs lose at this turn and at that turn. They do not enjoy minority status and their religion and culture is glossed over by the political decisions made in the middle of the 20th Century. More bitter herbs to swallow.
This is precisely the point that I had hoped you would make. Most people in the US who are not born into Sikhism are not aware of these situations. And thank you for including the constitution language for us to read.

I hope that you understood my point that the blending of Sikhs with Hindus by the government is a political strategy -- I am not going to criticize the decision, because it is not my business to do so, or my right. However, I do decry the social consequences for Sikhs. And I believe that the cultural confusion about who is Sikh and who is Hindu is only made more difficult to address because of this.

__________________
ਮਨ ਕਰਹਲਾ ਗੁਰ ਗੋਵਿੰਦੁ ਸਮਾਲਿ ॥ man karehalaa gur govindh samaal O camel-like mind, dwell upon the Guru and the Lord of the Universe.

<<But the minority status is not available to sikhs. Even the Muslims which may be 10 times the sikhs have this minority benefit to the extent that they get the 'Haj' subsidy for undertaking their Haz/pilgrimage from the tax payers money. Government Of India subsidises it.>>>

Sikh ji

pls back up with evidence.

i had posted a link which showed that Sikhs do enjoy Minority status in india. The minority status is awarded by states and not through out the country.

e.g. muslims in kashmir donot enjoy minority status for job benefits

Sikhs in Andhra and Karnataka get those benefits.

Sikhs will not get job/studying benefits in punjab as they are majority there.

pls donot write without facts.

The train jathas to Nankana sahib are also subsidised by government

SGPC colleges have been run till now as minority institutes

pls donot mis guide people !! This is my humble request

i had pointed out the fallacies of your logic and hoped that you would correct your approach of making claims without providing evidence.

<<Explanation II.- In sub-clause (b) of clause reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly>>

this is a generalization made for religious worship places.

however you chose to ignore the line above:

<<The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion. >>>

Indian census data, minorities commission and courts recognize Sikhism as a seperate religion.

however for simplicity till now the marriage act was the only common thread.

Do you know that Sikh religious places are governed under a law different from the one used for Hindu(jain & buddhist included) ???

__________________
Journey ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I have put up constitution' Article and it is for everyone to read and interpret. I do not want anyone to interpret things for me. Nor was your expert opinion required on this.

Muslims get the 'haz allowance' on the basis of minority in India or in any particular state only. Kindly clarify. I think they get subsidy because they are Muslims. You may correct me.

Is the number of jatha as big as the haajis.? Kindly clarify. Does jatha get the allowance every year and what is the size.?
I am not aware. You may like to throw some light on this as well if you are aware of these figures.

Are sikhs entitled for minority class in the cases of admission to various educational institutions/Government services all over India. Muslims get it all over the country. Had sikhs been treated as minority it should have been declared minority ab inito and de Facto.Sikhs have neither any minority status and nor will they have it both de juro and de facto. You replies should state the facts in a right manner.

A simple question to ponder: why in the above article 25 the sikhs have been included at the first place?

Things should have been simpler for sikhs to claim the minority status if the article was silient about this. The constitution Of India is most authentic document for any third Government to make a reference to. Do you think the French Government or the Government of US will listen to any individual or establish the identity of the sikhs through the written constitutional document that as per your goodself was drafted by some learned sikhs as well who preferred to not to sign the draft?

Let us face facts.

Ps.
I am taking off for a week and shall be able to attend to your posts after a week.Pl excuse me for this.

Also stop playing elder brother or state ....... do you know...???

Yes, I do know many other things and it is not necessary here unless it is required.

__________________

~~~**Jap mun Satnaam sda Satnaam...sda satnaam sda satnaam.....~~~

Let me also remind you,sir, that Sikhs have undergone the massacre of 1984 on account of some leaders of the ruling party and includes very prominent names.Hope you know this very well. Sikhs were cut and burnt like animalsand not butchered as I think a butcher will also not do this to an animal that was done in India with the sikhs. It should be a single example in the history as to how to kill.

I am a victim of this massacre that was irrational. Do you think it was political expediency or urgency.?It was neither. It was the hatred for the sikhs that got a vent out.

What was the crime of sikhs?.The single Sikh gaurd who shot the prime minister became the insignia for the entire community. It is beyond any ridiculism; Beyond any comprehensible human logic. It was without any reason. Your reason shall also fail to reason out the reason. Do you have any reply. Sir.? Do you not sympathise with the sikhs who suffered the trauma.?
My parents and most of my close extended family had also paid the price.
It could not have happened if the sikhs had the minority status as this would have made them powerful enough to ward off the madness. Don't you agree sir?
I hope you have not suffered the trauma of 84 riots. It is good for you as you are in Government service. My father was also in Government service but he died young. My mother is still nursing herself out of the shock and she is sick.

__________________

~~~**Jap mun Satnaam sda Satnaam...sda satnaam sda satnaam.....~~~

<<I do not want anyone to interpret things for me. Nor was your expert opinion required on this.>>

Sikh ji

i did not make any EXPERT comments, i only pointed out the errors. I am not a constitutional expert, but it doesnot take one to point out the false. and i think no one needs a license to point out mistakes, specially on a board.

However if that hurts you, my bad !!


<<<Muslims get the 'haz allowance' on the basis of minority in India or in any particular state only. Kindly clarify. I think they get subsidy because they are Muslims. You may correct me.

Is the number of jatha as big as the haajis.? Kindly clarify. Does jatha get the allowance every year and what is the size.?>>>

Sikhs also get the Jatha allowance based on minority status and is not linked to state etc.

I am not currently in punjab, else would have been more than happy to get you the numbers, why don't you yourself apply for Jatha visit and find out ?

I think a train full of people goes every year...my guess...could be 1000 odd people...


Muslims are 17% and sikhs are mere 2%, so the funds are apportioned accordingly.

<<Are sikhs entitled for minority class in the cases of admission to various educational institutions/Government services all over India. Muslims get it all over the country.>>>

no muslims do not get it all over india.

sikhs get it in AP & Karnataka, where they are sizeable minority.


<<Had sikhs been treated as minority it should have been declared minority ab inito and de Facto.Sikhs have neither any minority status and nor will they have it both de juro and de facto.>>>

sikhs have a minority status. They are listed as beneficiaries of the provisions of the minority Commission, how the benefits are delivered are decided by the states of residence.

<<Also stop playing elder brother or state ....... do you know...???

Yes, I do know many other things and it is not necessary here unless it is required.>>>

is this a threat??

i hope you can maintain decorum of a sane and civil discussion, which i always strive to do. I have not tried to do any Big Brother or state act with you.

and please stop making assumtions that i am a government employee spying on you...hahahaha

i am just an Indian citizen defending my constitution against falsification and mud slinging. I am just trying to bring another perspective. You might like it or dislike it, it's your choice.

Have a nice time in your week off.

PS

I do not want to reply to your second post as i believe it stems more from an anguished heart than a calm mind.

except for one point:

<<It could not have happened if the sikhs had the minority status as this would have made them powerful enough to ward off the madness. Don't you agree sir?>>>

this has happened a lot in other placs too. This is not a justification, but minority status or not, it might not have made a difference, sadly.

God Bless you with peace.

__________________
Journey ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~