Welcome to SPN

Register and Join the most happening forum of Sikh community & intellectuals from around the world.

Sign Up Now!

Is Everyone A Sikh?

Discussion in 'Sikh Sikhi Sikhism' started by RD1, Dec 16, 2016.

  1. Original

    Original
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    894
    Likes Received:
    523
    ..excuse me ! I see nothing condescending in the statement, "..sikh not sikhi", but rather a grammatical correction consistent with the topic to hand [Is everyone a Sikh]. I'm sorry you misperceived.
    ..perhaps !
    lol..thank you ! the penny did drop, hence, stopped talking Sikh and started walking Sikh.

    Goodnight -
     
  2. sukhsingh

    sukhsingh
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    301
    Likes Received:
    133
    Lol

    Without this exchange becoming overly combative what I found patronising was your suggestion 'the penny may drop for me one day'. I'm glad it has for you.. Please forgive ignorance.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  3. sukhsingh

    sukhsingh
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    301
    Likes Received:
    133
    When I wrote "I may well believe you are missing the point and out of step with the spirit of sikhi." I was trying to elucidate the fact that we all have our own beliefs and interpretations, but just as you may believe I have misunderstood your truth I could equally dismiss you and your opinions as misguided. Surely it's better to find a more constructive approach
     
    • Like Like x 2
  4. sukhsingh

    sukhsingh
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    301
    Likes Received:
    133
    are we not all walking sikh? And since we choose to discuss our thoughts on this platform are we not all talking sikh..?
     
    • Like Like x 2
  5. sukhsingh

    sukhsingh
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    301
    Likes Received:
    133
    To quote 'the verve' - I'm a million different people from one day to the next..

    Personally I find critical debate and critique of my own thoughts /propositions /understanding of great benefit. However it is only of value when the approach to challenging is constructive rather than dismissive
     
    • Agree Agree x 2
  6. Tejwant Singh

    Tejwant Singh United States
    Expand Collapse
    Mentor Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,577
    Likes Received:
    7,021
    This is the reason a Sikh is a conversationalist rather than a believer of some blind faith. A Sikh learns through questioning, not by believing blindly. Blind faith makes people blind where as conversation opens the eyes and the doors.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  7. dalvindersingh grewal

    dalvindersingh grewal India
    Expand Collapse
    Writer Historian SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2010
    Messages:
    328
    Likes Received:
    293
    Most of the definitions given above are mixed up with the clarifications for connotations of 'Sikh', 'Gursikh', 'Gurmukh', 'Singh' and 'Khalsa.' All these are different terminologies and are needed to be understood inb their different forms.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  8. sukhsingh

    sukhsingh
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    301
    Likes Received:
    133
    I fully agree. I for one would find it very helpful to use language that is concise. For me I see the term 'sikh' as all inclusive, hence my original comment. Developing a 'lingua franca' is for me the first step. In many ways it's the absence of this which creates 90% of issues. I'm a pedant and hence for me I perceive a conflation of terms. They well be one and the same but I until someone or thing illuminates me to what I am missing in my logic I will struggle.. Straight up, I at this point in my understanding see sikh and khalsa as words which mean different things..
    Sukh
     
    • Like Like x 2
  9. Harkiran Kaur

    Harkiran Kaur Canada
    Expand Collapse

    Leader

    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jul 21, 2012
    Messages:
    1,249
    Likes Received:
    1,823
    My question still stands.

    If we can call every human a Sikh then we need a term to use to differentiate those who follow Sikhi. Not all those who follow Sikhi are Khalsa / Amritdhari. Some are Sehejdhari, some are Kesdhari, but they still follow Sikhi. Those terms on their own do not define a 'follower of a particular belief system' such as Sikhi. So if we can no longer use Sikh Panth to describe those following the Sikh faith, then we need to determine some descriptor that encompasses that.

    Can you see my point, if you point at a Christian and say they are a Sikh, and then someone asks you well I thought that guy who wears a turban there and goes to the Gurdwara was a Sikh so what is he then? In the broader sence, he'd be a Sikh but why not just use the term that already exists which encompasses ALL (who invariably learn through their lives) and that term is 'human'?? If we remove the term 'Sikh' from the faith known as 'Sikhi' then we need a new descriptor to use in conversation to refer to those specifically who follow Sikhi (whether they are sehejdhari, kesdhari, amritdhari etc).
     
  10. Original

    Original
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    894
    Likes Received:
    523
    Good morning All

    Look, am I missing something here ? The question was [quote, RD1] "Do you believe that everyone is a Sikh?" and not whether everyone practiced Sikhi. Where the former a "noun" [Sikh] the latter a "verb" [Sikhi]. And, just as head and tail are two different sides of the one coin so is Sikh n Sikhi. The owner of the thread has "specifically" requested to know the "sikh" side and not Sikhi per se. In other words, the "particular" from the "general" [formal logic].

    In answering the question, I said, "Both HKJ and Sukh are right in their estimation of what is a "sikh". From an academic perspective it would follow that since Sikhism is a system of belief, which is supported and implemented by institution everyone is not a Sikh, only those who believe n follow are Sikhs. From an ideological perspective and by definition [Sanskrit] everyone is a Sikh since learning is intrinsic to human nature".

    I offered an affirmative and consistent an answer [above] to the case in point and Harkiran Ji, quite rightly raised the following: "But, I don't think that the 'learning' that qualifies one as being a Sikh, is just any old learning..."

    To which, I responded, thus " ..much of what makes us human is cultural, passed from generation to generation through a process called "learning" [sikhya]. It's from within this perspective I generalised the term "sikh" to embrace humanity on the whole, but insofar the unique n particular construction of the word "sikh" is to effect distinctive vocabulary then I concur with your observation above".

    I now turn to the live debate that is relevant to the case in point [Is everyone a Sikh, note, not Sikhi. No offence intended].
    ..human nature has many facets. For example, intellectual, moral, social, political, religious, etc. And, from within the scio-religious sector, Sikh the "particular" [believers of Nanak's satnam] from the "general" [world at large] suffices for that very reason [formal logic]. Accordingly, those that believe in Nanak's "satnam" tick the corresponding box [Sikh] on their statutory declarations.
    ..correct !
    ..correct !
    ..they are "relative" pronouns, meaning, they are connected in some respect to the "absolute" noun, Sikh. Take the word football for example; it has two syllables, foot n ball. Together they make football. Ball on its own is no more a physical object like the rest of inanimate matter unless it gets kicked about and played as a sport, football [true nature of the game football crystallising]. By the same analogy, Sehejdhari and Keshdhari are empty words unless they'd be associated to an ideology to effect meaning. And, just as the players of the game are called footballers so are the followers of Nanak's school of thought, called Sikh [true nature of the spiritual human].
    ..I do indeed, and a valid one - thank you ! I've made an attempt addressing the same for clarification.

    Good day !
     
    #30 Original, Dec 19, 2016
    Last edited: Dec 19, 2016
  11. Sikhilove

    Sikhilove Qatar
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer

    Joined:
    May 12, 2016
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    121
    Hi

    Your post has come across a bit harsh, I truly believe that Original is coming from a good place. You may not agree with his posts and some may find some of them patronising, but out of all of the forums online, I like this one the most, it's full of people who genuinely want to learn about Sikhi and it would be great if people treated each other with respect here :)
     
    • Like Like x 1
  12. Satbir singh ajnala

    Satbir singh ajnala India
    Expand Collapse
    SIKH :The Unique Identity
    SPNer

    Joined:
    Dec 14, 2016
    Messages:
    4
    Likes Received:
    2
    I THINK SIKH IS A NAME IN SIKHISM IS SPIRIT (SHARDA), LOVE WITH GURU, other things are secondary in sikhism. SIKHI IS A GAME OF LOVE.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  13. Original

    Original
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    894
    Likes Received:
    523
    Sikhilove Ji

    Thank you for speaking up and repudiating anti-social behaviour [ASB] on a public domain for the want of civility n tolerant a sangat - trait of a "true Sikh". It was lack of respect n dignity for the human being that prompted young Nanak to take a stand against the mighty Mughals. Hence, Sikhism. I salute you for highlighting fundamental values of respect and dignity of a person.

    Exposing the kind of behaviour exhibited by the gentleman in question must be championed because it subjects it to scrutiny rather than exclusion from consideration. It is the duty of the host provider to exercise care and control to ensure harmony and well being of it's members remains a top priority. Rhetorical and metaphorical violence causes psychological injury and must never be allowed to manifest in the first place. The irony however, in this case is the gentleman in question is a mentor to the host provider. It makes you wonder whether Sikhism need enemies when you've got mentors like these !

    All is not doom n gloom, I'm pleased to say SPN are doing all they possibly can to uphold fundamental freedoms and the rights of humans to practice and enjoy their God given rights in a democratic society.

    On a conservative note, I'm equally guilty I guess, in places for the "jat" kinda banter which is not always welcomed. And, I'm sorry if I come across as such ! I am all in all, a true Sikh, encompassing All faiths but practicing 1 - Singh is King !

    Once again Sikhilove Ji, thank you - means a lot !

    Good day !
     
    • Like Like x 1
    #33 Original, Dec 20, 2016
    Last edited: Dec 20, 2016
  14. sukhsingh

    sukhsingh
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Aug 14, 2012
    Messages:
    301
    Likes Received:
    133
    So is everyone sikh?
     
    • Like Like x 1
  15. Tejwant Singh

    Tejwant Singh United States
    Expand Collapse
    Mentor Writer SPNer Contributor

    Joined:
    Jun 30, 2004
    Messages:
    4,577
    Likes Received:
    7,021
    Sukh Singh ji,

    Guru Fateh,

    I can also see Harkiran ji's side because she is a convert to Sikhi from a background where names/definitions do matter. This is the beauty of this Sikhi prism. And she is right in her thinking. In reality, Sikhi has no conversion. A person molds her/himself into it.

    So, everyone is a sikh but a few call themselves Sikhs, which is also fine.
     
    • Like Like x 2
  16. Sikhilove

    Sikhilove Qatar
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer

    Joined:
    May 12, 2016
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    121
    Glad to see everyone getting along lol :)

    In response to the topic,

    Everyone is at their own stage of learning. A Sikh is a Bhagat, someone who has seriously grasped the blessing of walking(or running) down the path of Truth. Sikh means Student and we are students of Truth, the Gurus students. We learn and apply the Gyan of Gurbani to our daily lives.

    The path isn't meant to be difficult because the Gyan is simple. Sometimes the Bhagat may fall and then rise up again.

    Really, All souls are sangat, the slanderer, the saint, the human, the angel, the demon- the problem is that they don't Actually Know that they're sangat because they haven't seriously started on the path of self discovery.

    Bhagats are recognised sangat.

    To treat all with respect and in acceptance that they are at the stage of learning that He wants them to be and to love All, not only humans, but the Universe as a whole, as Truth is beautiful.
     
    • Like Like x 1
  17. Original

    Original
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer

    Joined:
    Jan 10, 2011
    Messages:
    894
    Likes Received:
    523
    ..affirmative !
     
  18. Sikhilove

    Sikhilove Qatar
    Expand Collapse
    Writer SPNer

    Joined:
    May 12, 2016
    Messages:
    289
    Likes Received:
    121
    No problem :)
     
    • Like Like x 1
Since you're here... we have a small favor to ask...     Become a Supporter      ::     Make a Contribution     


Loading...
Similar Threads Forum Date
Hello Everyone :) My Experience Of Sikhi New to Sikhism Jun 18, 2014
Evolutionary Biologist Explains: Dieting Is A Disaster For Everyone Health & Nutrition Sep 22, 2013
Opinion Why Is Everyone On The Internet So Angry? Breaking News Oct 7, 2012
20 Surprising Benefits Of Meditation Everyone Should Know Spiritual Articles Sep 5, 2012
Does Everyone Understand The Prayers At The Gurdwara New to Sikhism Apr 9, 2011

Share This Page