Today we view Sikhism as a religion that encompasses the practice of a set of morals/virtues/values that come exclusively from historical experiences or stories.
These morals include being kind, feeding others, being tolerant, charity etc.
Sikhism, in its modern form, is a religion whose values are derived exclusively from story.
The more frequently a sort of nuanced phrase or word appears in the Granth (Guru, Parsad, Amrit, etc.), the more likely it will have an external story that surrounds it.
These stories, however, have nothing to do with the actual argument that accompanied the rest of the word/phrase in the Granth.
The point of using these words in these stories is to give the story validity.
So when a Sikh checks the Granth, he easily correlates the story and the Granth because of the appearance of the phrases and words.
This process of correlation without objective thinking leads him to believe more in the story which was already presented to him as the truth, and he is less likely to question it. Moreover, the story changes his ability to objectively view the Granth without bias.
These stories are derived in two places:
First, the Janamsakhi and its counterpart “Granths” from their various Nirmala authors.
Example: the association of the word Amrit with the story of the Panj Pyare.
This kills what Amrit truly is because it can no longer be read objectively.
Because reading it objectively would mean one would have to invalidate the story for a moment to see the meaning outside of it, and the story is the basis of the current state of the religion he believes, so he would have to invalidate his own beliefs.
Most minds are not capable of this because they have no spiritual identity outside of religion.
Religion does not equal Sikhi. If you actually read what the Adh Granth writers are observing, Sikhi is simply someone who learns from their Sat Gur. But to realize this you first have to read without any baggage of what is right and wrong.
Second, and the most unnoticed distorter, various speeches from preachers, prachaarik, granthis.
These speeches are extended stories.
Because of the high prevalence of ritual readings, container worship, and the overconsumption of “Sikh” tragedies:
For example, the baani of Kabir
"Ganga ki lehar meri tootsie janjeer" is connected to a fake story where Kabir was chained and thrown into Ganga, but miraculously his chains were broken by Goddess Ganga.
The actual poem means the opposite.
He's dismissing the worship of Ganga.
The chains were the Ganga holy river priest idea chains that his Satguru broke off of him.
The kathavachak Brahmin tells this story on stage to destroy the message Kabir is giving.
Go to any "Bhai Ji" with this baani in hand, and he will tell you this ignorant saakhi.
These stories are the third party that stands between the Sikh and Granth, causing a disconnect with the true nature of its writings.
Because the Sikh bases his identity on these stories, he cannot push them out of the way to access the Granth because he feels as if he is pushing away a part of himself.
Overall, the basis of Sikhi is values/virtues/morals that are solely learned from and based on distorted stories, and therefore the Sikh, the practitioner of these beliefs, himself is distorted.
And to note, if Sikhi is based on stories, then its practitioners are susceptible to any good storyteller no matter if they do malignant things.
Overall if Sikhi is based only on values/virtues/morals that have no proper origin then at some point they will fail.
As they have presently with modern Sikhs.
These morals include being kind, feeding others, being tolerant, charity etc.
Sikhism, in its modern form, is a religion whose values are derived exclusively from story.
The more frequently a sort of nuanced phrase or word appears in the Granth (Guru, Parsad, Amrit, etc.), the more likely it will have an external story that surrounds it.
These stories, however, have nothing to do with the actual argument that accompanied the rest of the word/phrase in the Granth.
The point of using these words in these stories is to give the story validity.
So when a Sikh checks the Granth, he easily correlates the story and the Granth because of the appearance of the phrases and words.
This process of correlation without objective thinking leads him to believe more in the story which was already presented to him as the truth, and he is less likely to question it. Moreover, the story changes his ability to objectively view the Granth without bias.
These stories are derived in two places:
First, the Janamsakhi and its counterpart “Granths” from their various Nirmala authors.
Example: the association of the word Amrit with the story of the Panj Pyare.
This kills what Amrit truly is because it can no longer be read objectively.
Because reading it objectively would mean one would have to invalidate the story for a moment to see the meaning outside of it, and the story is the basis of the current state of the religion he believes, so he would have to invalidate his own beliefs.
Most minds are not capable of this because they have no spiritual identity outside of religion.
Religion does not equal Sikhi. If you actually read what the Adh Granth writers are observing, Sikhi is simply someone who learns from their Sat Gur. But to realize this you first have to read without any baggage of what is right and wrong.
Second, and the most unnoticed distorter, various speeches from preachers, prachaarik, granthis.
These speeches are extended stories.
Because of the high prevalence of ritual readings, container worship, and the overconsumption of “Sikh” tragedies:
For example, the baani of Kabir
"Ganga ki lehar meri tootsie janjeer" is connected to a fake story where Kabir was chained and thrown into Ganga, but miraculously his chains were broken by Goddess Ganga.
The actual poem means the opposite.
He's dismissing the worship of Ganga.
The chains were the Ganga holy river priest idea chains that his Satguru broke off of him.
The kathavachak Brahmin tells this story on stage to destroy the message Kabir is giving.
Go to any "Bhai Ji" with this baani in hand, and he will tell you this ignorant saakhi.
These stories are the third party that stands between the Sikh and Granth, causing a disconnect with the true nature of its writings.
Because the Sikh bases his identity on these stories, he cannot push them out of the way to access the Granth because he feels as if he is pushing away a part of himself.
Overall, the basis of Sikhi is values/virtues/morals that are solely learned from and based on distorted stories, and therefore the Sikh, the practitioner of these beliefs, himself is distorted.
And to note, if Sikhi is based on stories, then its practitioners are susceptible to any good storyteller no matter if they do malignant things.
Overall if Sikhi is based only on values/virtues/morals that have no proper origin then at some point they will fail.
As they have presently with modern Sikhs.
