Ashamed To Be Sikh

Dear Friends,

Just like many of you, I was born and raised a Sikh. I have gone to Sikh Gurdwaras since an early age and sat in the sangat and absorbed the teachings of the "gurus." At an early age, I attended a large Gurdwaras California, however my family located when I was 16 to a different sate with a much smaller Gurdwara. However we still continue to attend on a regular basis, my admittance up until this day is consistence. I go every Sunday with my parents and on special occasions when there is a special Sikh holiday.

I am 23 now, and graduated last year from a very reputed university, where I Majored in Political Science and History, I also minored in Religious Studies. Currently I am in first year Law School, and these inquiried keep popping in to my head as I study Religion and Law.

I have had a profound interest in world religions nice an early age, perhaps the age of 14-15 when I started to discovered that Sikhism is not the only region. I even attend Church with a couple of my friends on several acassion and say without a doubt that the Christines were very welcoming people. I also got the opportunity of sit in several Singaguous and observer their letures. Upon entering college, I was also fortunate enough to meet several Muslim who invited me to "open mosque" days where non Muslims were welcomed and given lectured on Islamic history.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/sikh-sikhi-sikhism/33014-ashamed-to-be-sikh.html

Regardless, my point for pointing out my well versed religious knowledge is to point out that, I as a Sikh, consider my self to be well versed in History and Religion. I do not want to sound condescending or an elitist, but I would consider my self more versed than 90% of the public when it comes to matters of region and history.

Now to my point.

I have a profound shame to Sikhs for the following reasons.

I wanted to type these points in greater detail, but time is limited and wanted to get something out here so dialog can begin.

1. Historical Inconsistency and Unverifiable History
From a young age, I have inquired about the stories and the lectures given in our Gurdwara. from the story of Nanak stopping a huge rock with his bare hands, to the battles fought by Gobind Singh. My first point is that despite these stories being told several hundred times, it does not make them true. I have personally visited the sight of the supposed hand print, and it does not appear to be a hand, it simply an outlined that was placed much later. Scientific evidence has confirmed this fact and there is not impact in that region of the rock. Other stories such as epic battles of Gobind Singh seem to be exaggerated by the Sikh religion, to say the least. I have researched history from this time period, and can no find any significant 3rd party evidence to confirm that such large battles did take pace. Do you not ever consider how one man can fight 5,000? With an arrow in his chest? There are several other inconsistency in stories that I hear every day in the Gurdawara, however there are too many to point out. Regardless of the fact. I would like to know, why are these stories not able to be confirmed by scientific data or other 3rd party historical account? I think this is a question that needs to be raised and discussed openly, I brought up this question to my local granthi, and his simple response was that the we know this to be true because the Gurus tell us this.

As as alluded before to my study of religion before, I know that other religions also have unverifiable history. However, I find two main difference between their region and the Sikh religion.

a. Most other religions, do not teach their religious history as "fact," but rather "this is what we believe." This is fundamental difference that must be addressed. When ever I try to question a key fact in Sikhism, it is as if i were questioning the word the god. In fact, all Gurdwara and Sikh treat their religious stories as "fact" and do not even entertain the notion that there can be misrepresentations or logical / historical inconsistency.

b. In all other major regions, there is stories that do not match with with historical account. However, to a large degree, these religions have a vast literature and intellectual inquiries in their houses or worships about these abnormality. I was takn a back the first time I went to the mosque and there were 4 Muslims discussing the supposed site of Muhammad's first house. I have also gone to Churches where there is open dialogue between the congregation where they openly question their religion and the inconsistency. However, I do not find this in the Sikh temples. Regardless of this, how is it possible that these religions still have documented evidence and open dialog about the lack of about such things from Noha's Arch, shroud of turin, to what is in the kabah.

2. Lack of Knowledge and Desired Knowledge / Religious Text

I am sure many of you are or know someone who is baptized. Many of the things that baptized individuals part take in is to pray, in the morning and evening. Both of my grandmothers and a couple of other individuals in my family are baptized. At a young age, I would question them about what they are regurgitating as they rocked back and forth reading out of their little book. However, I never got an clear cut answer. As I got older, I would question more people about what they are reading, and why? However, till this day, I have not met a single person, including a dozen granthis, who do not have any idea about what they are regurgitating every morning and night. I will admit that majority of them know have little about about several individual lines, however, I am condifent to say that none of them have even 50% knowlege about what they are reguraduating every morinig and night.

My surprise does not come from the fact that they do not know. It comes from rather the lack of desire to know. they are perfectly content that they are doing enough to fulfill their duties as a bapsitised individual that they do not even sedire to find out. I have received such ambiguous answers as

"No one knows what it says."

"We are not meant to understand."

"We can not even grasp how sweet the words are."

Again, my problem is not with the fact that they do not know but rather:

a. A Sikh is someone who is always learning, someone who is on earth for the mere reason to learn and understand. Yet these individuals have not desire to understand what is written in the spiritual text.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=33014

b. Why is it that other religion's scared text are actually readable by anyone who picks them up? I have read a significant portion of the Bible, and majority of the Koran, and actually understand what it says in there.

c. I am not saying that all Sikhs do not know what it says in this religious text. I am sure a lot of you will attempt to point out your superior knowledge on the matter, however I would like to point out that you are in the minority and a breed of your own. Otherwise you would not be on this forum.


I Have not completed all of my objections to Sikhism, I will add and edit the about information and arguments as I have time.

Please excuse my grammatical errors and spelling. I just wanted to get this up here so a dialog can ensue and maybe I can learn something.

3. Hypocrisy in Sikhism

4. Attacks on Islam / Lack of Understanding / Denial of Similarity

5. Sikh Theory vs. Reality

 
Do share your immediate thoughts or reactions on this issue? We value your views! Login Now! or Sign Up Today! to share your views with us.. Gurfateh!

Dear w.ftw Ji,

I understand your frustrations.

All I would like to say is don't judge Sikhi on those who claim to follow it, but instead read up for yourself what is written then decide how you feel. The Guru Granth Sahib is there to be read, understood and practiced and this forum is one of the places that will encourage you to do just that.

I do not judge Christianity based on the misguided people who ran the crusades or were the cause of Australia's stolen generation.
I do not judge Islam by the actions of suicide bombers.
I do not judge Judaism by the caricature of money lenders.
I do not judge Hinduism on those who follow by blind faith.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=33014

Sikhi rather than Sikhism deserves your attention. Only by knowing the philosophy yourself can you positively influence those around you. Your interest and your ability to see inconsistencies in behaviour around you will take you a long way. Always judge a philosophy by its teachings not the followers as followers are human and will always trip up!
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=33014

Best wishes,
Jasleen Kaur.

"W,tfw.says Why is it that other religion's scared text are actually readable by anyone who picks them up? I have read a significant portion of the Bible, and majority of the Koran, and actually understand what it says in there".



Your problem, W.FTW is very much like... you just do not understand religion or perhaps like it very much to become gullible with what lies on the other side.The saying the pasture is not always green on the other side is very much your state of mind, from what I have understood.The exception being YOU do believe it is green just by seeing!!

As a student of religion that you say you are, it looks more like you are a man scrabbling to put a frock on, when you should be putting the pants on!

In the name of science and religion you appear to have learnt a lot by stage manning visits to mosques and churches, while being oblivionly ignorant about your own.But you have with no less preposteriousity , then suggested as you are now an authority on other religions, that you beliitle Sikhism.You then tried to make your misbeliefs near reverential, so as to make some people take the unfounded seriously.As we live in an age, inclined to believe everything science says even when it flies in the face of common sense and the practical Guru Granth sahib, you have used science to demote the values of Sikhism.But science is also not complete, as with the bumble bee concept!But Gurbani is.

However, I am NOT convinced of you, and your motives neither, I believe, you have the acceptable real knowledge and understanding of Sikhism as you have attempted to portay and lead us to believe.Therefore, I make no apologies, that some the terms I have used are deliberately hard , and hit hard, as I think, you deserve that.

I will simply ask you one question based upon your acclaimed knowldge of the Koran etc, which you have understood largely or in the majority.

I will point out that as a student of religion, you have either deliberately or with a certain pre-reasonning omitted to say,[ based on the scientific evidence] ...that the koran was written 80 years AFTER Mohamad's death.While the bible even based on the old testament was written more than 90 years after Christ's.

I see no scientific evidence presented by you to suggest that the writers of the koran and bible indeed wrote exactly what was said by Christ or Mohamad either.How did you accept that so wilfully?For logic's sake, your argument is faulty to begin with, as you use two different standards.


Issues are forgotten and twisted within a year,and by the time it reaches the 5th person, but how after at last 80 years the words in the Koran and Bible can remain the same?There is no record that anything was written down during the lives of Mohamad and Christ, apart from the ten commandments.There is no record of such documents existing.

By making significant such omissions I smell clearly an intent and purpose to show "Sikhism to be ashamed of" deliberately by you.

Now, my one question to you...How did you read the Koran and in what language?Arabic?You must have read the Bible in English, what stops you reading and understanding the Gurbani in English?

By your own admission , it appears you have NOT read the Guru Granth sahib, then how did you manage to compare the Guru Granth sahib then to the koran and bible or the tohra?As I see, there is a motive for your own embarrasment.Perhaps lack of self confidence and esteem?It certainly appears your intent was create a controversy,harmful to Sikhism,but nothing more.I question your claim to be a student of religion; and say you are a very poor student indeed; and not one in a position to write skillfully upon religion in a truly comparative manner.


At this point, may, I point out that the Guru Granth sahib was dictated and written by followers and scribes of the Gurus as the Gurus spoke the messages of God.NOT after and NOT before.Neither ANY of the shabads can be changed for as long long as the world lives on.

If you are seeking scientific evidence, I dont think the battle of Karbala or the crusades provided that either.If they do then it is the same plaque placed years later.The plaques that you appear to condemn as regards to Sikhism.


I think you have misconeceptions about the claim of 5000 fighting a single person.Nowhere it states that.What it says is that the Guru created a magnificience of a persona who was able to face 125,000 mentally, spiritually and challenge that. That also does not say it was a certain victory, but certain death more like.

THe SIKH history, is for real, much of it written by its advesaries like Moghuls and THEIR writers, who were Mohamadans and much more by the hindu writers, who many a time reluctantly had to acknowledge trhe bravery and greatness and steadfast spirituality of the Sikhs and their religion.That speaks for itself.Even Nadir Shah after being harrased by the minority Sikh bands admitted that the day is not far off when they will rule supreme both spiritually and the land in the face of hardship and tyranny.That is itself is the icing in the cake.It does NOT need scientific rationale as it is a written record.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=33014

To claim that much of the Sikh teachings are related to history in itself is mirroring the lack of insight and understanding about the Sikh religion.To totally pull blinders over eyes regards its spiritual aspects and family life is clear evidence of a biased mind and thinking.But unlike others, Sikhs have cherished and preserved in oral tradition much of their history.That is not wrong , but very much like fertiliser to the younger generations, although sometimes can be slightly distorted by individuals, just as yiou have attempted.

Of course there are questions asked and challenges offered just like any other religion.Sikhs have the capacity to respond and answer and change within the confines of the Gurbani and set precedents, unlike Christianity that has no boundaries or islam that breaks every decent boundary in its quest to bring allah out of Mecca!Sikhism is not curtailed by such boundaries nor fuelled with venom of hatred.The concept of it's langger institution is evident enough of that value.


As a student of religion, and with an intent, I see clearly you have not subjected your views entirely to study of comparative religions, but also mixed and have confused yourself with behaviourial sciences, cultural traits and mentallity related to lack of education and understanding that is prevalent among Sikhs with regard to their own and have tried to present that has the 'faults' of the Sikh religion.


How very far from honesty and home truth, have you ventured exposes the real understanding of a supposedly student of religion!


The mish mesh of negative points that have been aired by you have absolutely NOTHING to do with Sikhism.They are traits of behaviours prevalent among people of any society and religion.

Such exist in among other religions perhaps to a greater degree,for example the abuses of women and children within Christianity, the blind bombings and beheadings among the muslims and against the so called kaffirs......Sikhism for its share has some of those who make and break and misrepresent their own rules as they go along, but that has nothing absolutely to do with the proper teachings and Gurbani; as you seem to have presented coyly.neither Sikhism can be counted as an extremist faith.

Finally, let me share about myself.I was born and bred in a muslim country and a state where muslims were predominant.I have been to Mosques many times,and shared often in their celebrations, when they were not so extremely brainwashed.

I went all my life to a Christian Missionary school , where I not only attended the church regularly, but also twice completed an Emmaus Bible Course with 100%.Many of my friends were Buddhist and Hindus,Taoists, and Bahais and perhaps animist as well, among Muslims and Christians.

I was the only Sikh in my last two years of school.I fluently speak more than 10 languages including Tamil,Thai and Chinese.I read and write about five including Punjabi.I Must say, no other religion impressed me more than Sikhism.I could have been any other by choice, I choose to be a Sikh.

I did not learn about Islam hinduism or christianity or the other religions by stage manning and visiting mosques or churches , Pagodas,but by growing up among them, while understanding them, I also had the good fortunate to learn about my own.

I have travelled to Iran, Pakistan, Turkey and many other countries and I believe I am quite an authority on these religions as much I know my own,and greatfully I am PROUD and glad to be a Sikh.

The fact that you have disappeared, explains it all.It also reminds me about the Nutty Professor!But I believe it is too facile a tag.I would say students such as you are dangerous-dangerous in hiding the true agenda and dangerous because the thinking that you are advancing would be a disaster for not only Sikhism, but any decent level headed Muslim, Christian and Hindu and their religions.

Dear WFTW

It's a good thought provoking post and I would like to offer a few observations

I appreciate what you are trying to say here. I think you will find, as I have done, that there are many learned people on this forum.


What is your understanding of religion and spirituality and the purpose and value of following such paths? Are these aspects you have highlighted above of more value and greater importance than the sublime wisdom that Sri Guru Granth SahibJ contains


I'm afraid I would have to disagree with this point having come across many "defenders of the faith" who do do proclaim the literal word to be true...just look at Creationists for example. One very big advantage that Sikhism does have however is that it is relatively young compared to older religions:[LIST][/LIST
]the scriptures have not been subject to the same manipulation and endless retranslations
there is historical evidence to prove the existence of the Gurus and the key events in their lives
there is archeological evidence that can be directly attributed to the Gurus[LIST]

I, for one, have no problem with the sort of open dialogue you suggest. The way I see it, providing the intent is genuine and there is a willingness to learn and be challenged, then no one would lose in such a debate.....everyone would gain

I really don't think you are in a position to make such an assessment

Good point

So have I and from what I have seen to date, I would regard Sri Guru Granth SahibJ as being eminently more readable and to the point


It goes back to my earlier question about the purpose of following any path in the first place. I would suggest one reason would be to achieve a level of contentment. I admire those who do so and are content, irrespective of their level of spiritual knowledge or philosophical understanding

I also concur with everything Jasleen said in her post. This is for you only. Never mind anyone else. Tell us more about what YOU think about the scriptures in terms of the impact they have on YOUR values and norms

Good! I think this can develop into a great thread. Thanks for getting it started.

First, please stop being ashamed of being Sikh. Our Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, even in translation contains wisdom and direction beyond anything else I have read, and I'm an avid reader. We have some problems and few of us are true Gursikhs.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=33014

There must be something here since so many have cxhosen death over conversion.

As to not believing our history, next you'll be trying to convince me that Baba Deep Singh didn't really carry his head in one hand and fight with his sword in the other. Be careful. Be very, very careful.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=33014

BTW, Christians are called upon to believe all sorts of historical oddities that must not be questioned, many but not all, about Jesus.

Here in lies the problem with this kind of post.

wftw (as i have done before him) brought to attention a problem that effects the large majority of sikhs (although, not necessarily the minority of sikhs on this site). The problem of willful ignorance on the part of many sikhs for one. I feel like this site, however, takes an almost neutral position on these kinds of issues. As if the members of this site are saying "who care what they believe in, how they represent the religion, or what should be deemed as "fact"; instead, you should work on improving your own understanding of the guru granth, dont worry about those others who claim to be sikh."

There is something so very unsettling about that kind of an answer/response. (Seeker9 and findingmyway, im looking at you).

Those kinds of answers do nothing to solve the problem. And it seems as if your condeming him for even raising the issue by suggesting that he should read the guru granth and find his own path (or w/e). It a very lazy response due to the fact he wasnt even questioning the guru granth but rather the unbelievable "stories" that are being forwarded as "fact" in countless gurdwara's and family's. I too was raised on these stories, and it was these unbelievable stories that partly provided me with the impetus to leave the religion and become an atheist.

From a sikh perspective. If you dont address these silly stories and provide verifiable evidence, more and more young people will come to you with these tough questions. And if your response isnt satisfying (as it hasnt been so far) then sikhi is doomed to decline in numbers. It might be one of the youngest religions right now but i see no hope for it to become one of the oldest religions in the future. This is but one of the reasons why.
Reference:: Sikh Philosophy Network http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/showthread.php?t=33014

As a side note, can you (wsfw) provide a link for the scientific analysis of that handprint in the boulder thats attributed to Guru Nanak? :P although, I dont think its the "real deal" either, I feel like your point would be more valid if you could actually link to a scientific source that supports your point of view. That and I would love to read it myself :P

I'm going to suggest that he didnt do what you think he did. Indeed, even the wikipedia page regarding Deep Singh lists two accounts of his martyrdom and one is vastly more believeable then the one you quoted. I find it ironic that you decide to use that example as a "matter of fact" to suggest that the author be careful in the criticism he lays on sikh stories WHEN IN FACT, that story is the perfect example of one needing more inquiry. You've only strengthened the authors position by bringing up this story.

(eitherwhich way, I created a thread for the debate surrounding his death :P )

And they are no better for it either. I have to say, the only area in which i differ from the author of this thread is in the uneven distribution of criticism on sikhism alone. I think all religions are equally flawed when it comes to these sorts of matter. Christianity and Islam is no better then sikhism in this respect. All religions have major historical oddities.

Calm down, Caspian ji. I was being sarcastic. Sheesh!

Although a friend in a steel mill said he had seen a guy's head get cut off by some machinery and the guy ran, headless, somewhere. And then there was that headless chicken..

Contact me for the url of the YouTube video - some people wrote they were extremely upset by it. spnadmin
I guess I better stop before I get excommunicated or something.

I'm aware of the chicken example but thas because a portion of the chickens brain (enough to sustain life) is located much lower, around the neck of the chicken. The same thing cannot be said for humans. A person might be able to run for a short while ( i wouldnt know, and i cant think of any biological reason for why that should hapen—other then maybe a form of muscle memory) but the anatomy of the chicken makes for it to be possible (that a chicken can live for months without its head). The anotomy of humans on the other hand—not so much; let alone fight an entire battle.