Sikhi - Quasi-Pragmatists And Quasi-Spiritualists, Care To Explain? | Sikh Philosophy Network
  • Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
    Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
    Sign up Log in

Sikhi Quasi-Pragmatists And Quasi-Spiritualists, Care To Explain?

Currently reading:
Sikhi Quasi-Pragmatists And Quasi-Spiritualists, Care To Explain?

Admin Singh

Admin
SPNer
Jun 1, 2004
6,562
5,182
SPN
Gurfateh Ji

Recently, our learned members coined and introduced two new groups to Sikh school of thought to create and enhance unity amongst the Sikhs. Not only did they coined the new groups they also joined and designated a few to one group or the other!

Group 1. Quasi-Pragmatists;
Group 2. Quasi-Spiritualists;


So, I would request our learned members to define and explain these new Sikh entities in full details, by highlighting the individual attributes of each group.

Thank you.
 

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,029
7,158
Henderson, NV.
Gurfateh Ji

Recently, our learned members coined and introduced two new groups of Sikh school of thought. Not only did they coined the new groups they also joined and designated a few to one group or the other! Wow!

Group 1. Quasi-Pragmatism;
Group 2. Quasi-Spiritualists;


So, I would request our learned members to define and explain these new Sikh entities in full details, by highlighting the individual attributes of each group.

Thank you.
I hope the brave Sikh/s come out and educate all the members of SPN about their claims with specific examples rather than shying away in the sand when challenged.
 

Harkiran Kaur

Leader

Writer
SPNer
Jul 21, 2012
1,393
1,907
I hope the brave Sikh/s come out and educate all the members of SPN about their claims with specific examples rather than shying away in the sand when challenged.
Why don't you start then respected Tejwant Ji? Since you have on many occasion stated you believe in a pragmatic interpretation of Sikhi. Please enlighten us as to what exactly pragmatist Sikhs believe or do not believe?
 

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,029
7,158
Henderson, NV.
Why don't you start then respected Tejwant Ji? Since you have on many occasion stated you believe in a pragmatic interpretation of Sikhi. Please enlighten us as to what exactly pragmatist Sikhs believe or do not believe?
Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh.

I did not coin these terms nor did I divide Sikhi into groups. You and Original ji did the latter. For me, we are all Sikhs and due to the absence of Clergy in Sikhi, thanks to our visionary Gurus; each of us is responsible for our own Sikhi path. As it is the individual's path, it is open to questioning.

I have asked many questions here to Original ji about it but he gets mum for some reason when challenged and that is not a rare occurring.

One of those many questions were/are:
1. Was Guru NanaK pragmatist when he refused to wear the Janieu at the early age of 7?

As Original ji keeps mum when challenged, you may answer the question.

A pragmatist is someone who is pragmatic, that is to say, someone who is practical and focused on reaching a goal. A pragmatist usually has a straightforward, matter-of-fact approach and doesn't let emotion distract her.
pragmatist - Dictionary Definition : Vocabulary.com
Dictionary : Vocabulary.compragmatist
 
Last edited:

Harkiran Kaur

Leader

Writer
SPNer
Jul 21, 2012
1,393
1,907
Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh.

I did not coin these terms nor did I divide Sikhi into groups. You and Original ji did. For me, we are all Sikhs and due to the absence of Clergy in Sikhi, thanks to our visionary Gurus; each of us is responsible for our own Sikhi path. As it is the individual's path, it is open to questioning.

I have asked many questions here to Original ji about it but he gets mum for some reason when challenged and that is not a rare occurring.

One of those many questions were/are:
1. Was Guru NanaK pragmatist when he refused to wear the Janieu at the early age of 7?

As Original ji keeps mum when challenged, you may answer the question.

A pragmatist is someone who is pragmatic, that is to say, someone who is practical and focused on reaching a goal. A pragmatist usually has a straightforward, matter-of-fact approach and doesn't let emotion distract her.
pragmatist - Dictionary Definition : Vocabulary.com
Dictionary : Vocabulary.compragmatist
By your definition those of us who are focused on the spiritual goal then, and who find that practical are pragmatic as well...

Before I can answer your question, or at least give my opinion... you will have to explain to me what a Janieu is...
 

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,029
7,158
Henderson, NV.
Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh.

I have found the thread where we talk about pragmatism. Original ji gave you the origin of the word which is recent but forgot to give you its meaning. I hope it was just a slip.

Spiritual - Impressions of Gurbani - Sohila

My questions are in post#7. Would you be kind enough to answer all of the questions asked to Original ji which he copped out in answering for the reasons only known to him?

You will be able to grasp the meaning of pragmatism better sans foreign distractions about the world.

Thanks.

Tejwant Singh
 
Last edited:

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,029
7,158
Henderson, NV.
Last edited:

Harry Haller

Panga Master
SPNer
Jan 31, 2011
5,762
8,155
50
If the above is a definition of pragmatism, I am afraid that is me out ,

A pragmatist is someone who is pragmatic, that is to say, someone who is practical and focused on reaching a goal. A pragmatist usually has a straightforward, matter-of-fact approach and doesn't let emotion distract her.

I am certainly not a spiritualist, I am just learning with each day, that is what makes me a Sikh, I did not realise I had to choose a group..
 

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,029
7,158
Henderson, NV.
If the above is a definition of pragmatism, I am afraid that is me out ,

A pragmatist is someone who is pragmatic, that is to say, someone who is practical and focused on reaching a goal. A pragmatist usually has a straightforward, matter-of-fact approach and doesn't let emotion distract her.

I am certainly not a spiritualist, I am just learning with each day, that is what makes me a Sikh, I did not realise I had to choose a group..
Harry ji,

Guru Fateh.

You do not have to choose any group. You were put in a group by some who claim to be Spiritualist without your permission which is uncouth, nothing spiritual about it.

This seems like the Hunger Games movies where you are placed in a District. It seems the Group/the District we were shoved in was done arbitrarily by others. Little do they know that Sikhi is a journey of the individual.

Most of the Derawalas and people who want to insert Hindutva shove people in these kinds of groups to advance their personal agenda. One can see some who call themselves Sikhs but act and behave like Hindus and try to impose Hindu values on the Sikhs are here in this very forum with their fancy dresses and Sikh looks.

As you know, it is easy to look like a Sikh but difficult to become one. So these people with all the fancy dress regalia are made of papier mache from the outside which can be discarded at will. Perhaps, this is their agenda. But we are here as Sikhs to point them out and their agenda because not every caterpillar is capable of becoming butterfly. I wish they realised that.

Tejwant Singh
 
Last edited:

Harkiran Kaur

Leader

Writer
SPNer
Jul 21, 2012
1,393
1,907
In fact I have never coined the term pragmatist in relation to Sikhi. Someone else did... I think it was you or Harry Ji actually. I have always thought it was those who believe in spiritual interpretation of Gurbani and those who do not believe in spiritual and instead believe Gurbani to be merely speaking of states of mind (psychology). So I have no wish to pull apart meaning of pragmatism. I took it to mean you guys were using it to mean that anything you cant prove you do not believe in.

I think if Guru Nanak rejected some symbolic thread (I dont know the story exactly) then it was likely for the same reason as rejecting idol worship. Why worship a piece of stone, when God is everywhere and in everything? It makes no sense to worship one small stone piece of the Universe, when the divine light is equally inside yourself. It was the idea that God must only reside in certain places that was being rejected. (because of the truth that ALL IS ONE) Same for the story when he went to Mecca and made the statement that God does not only reside at the Qibbeh.

So with the thread I am assuming that it has nothing to do with having to prove or disprove anything (as per pragmatism or how its been used on this site) or being 'practical' but rather my guess is that it is more in line as the idol worship thing... but I don't know enough about why Hindus wear it - other than its part of initiation? We have to be careful though, because when one takes Amrit, we also don 5 articles of faith, which others can easily try to dismiss on our part.

So as per the dictionary definition of pragmatic, I don't think it had anything to do with it... but its just my opinion. Would you say that rejecting idol worship because God is not confined to one stone idol, but is instead in everyone... would you call that being pragmatic? I call it being spiritual. Recognizing that God IS ALL and is IN ALL so makes no sense to worship one idol - or to put it another way, why worship a part of Maya (illusion)? The stone idol is just part of Maya. Waheguru surpasses that. Maybe because he knew about this reality, that all is one, he rejected the thread because it was symbol of Hinduism which had many avatars which / polytheistic, and he believed / knew there is only ONE Creator and that ALL IS that Creator? So to wear that symbolism would go against his beliefs?? I dont know I have not read that story. But just thinking of reasons why he might reject it...
 

chazSingh

Writer
SPNer
Feb 20, 2012
1,644
1,639
Gurfateh Ji

Recently, our learned members coined and introduced two new groups to Sikh school of thought to create and enhance unity amongst the Sikhs. Not only did they coined the new groups they also joined and designated a few to one group or the other!

Group 1. Quasi-Pragmatists;
Group 2. Quasi-Spiritualists;


So, I would request our learned members to define and explain these new Sikh entities in full details, by highlighting the individual attributes of each group.

Thank you.
Is this any different to people being refered to as 'parroters'?

So anyone that repeats a shabad of gurbani is a 'parotter'...

Or they could be a 'lover' of gurbani?

Terms are used all the time to form description...don't think it warrants a thread lol.
 

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,029
7,158
Henderson, NV.
By your definition those of us who are focused on the spiritual goal then, and who find that practical are pragmatic as well...

Before I can answer your question, or at least give my opinion... you will have to explain to me what a Janieu is...
Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh,

Firstly, it is not my definition but picked from the dictionary. I never said anywhere what you are. That is for you to define. The meaning of pragmatist is clear. If you consider yourself one among other things, it has no effect on me but only on you how you understand your Sikhi journey as per our Gurus' teachings.

I hope you understood the meaning of Janieu from the thread I posted.

I would like you to respond to the questions about pragmatism as asked to Original ji in the post above.

Thanks
 
Last edited:

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,029
7,158
Henderson, NV.
Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh.

In fact I have never coined the term pragmatist in relation to Sikhi. Someone else did... I think it was you or Harry Ji actually.
Many Sikh scholars have used the same term for Sikhi, one well known is late Dr. Baldev Singh. I have been using it for a long time as part of my learning process.

I have always thought it was those who believe in spiritual interpretation of Gurbani and those who do not believe in spiritual and instead believe Gurbani to be merely speaking of states of mind (psychology). So I have no wish to pull apart meaning of pragmatism. I took it to mean you guys were using it to mean that anything you cant prove you do not believe in.
I have never mentioned that anywhere. The divisions in Sikhi were started here at SPN by Original ji and others including yourself.

I think if Guru Nanak rejected some symbolic thread (I dont know the story exactly) then it was likely for the same reason as rejecting idol worship. Why worship a piece of stone, when God is everywhere and in everything? It makes no sense to worship one small stone piece of the Universe, when the divine light is equally inside yourself. It was the idea that God must only reside in certain places that was being rejected. (because of the truth that ALL IS ONE) Same for the story when he went to Mecca and made the statement that God does not only reside at the Qibbeh.

So with the thread I am assuming that it has nothing to do with having to prove or disprove anything (as per pragmatism or how its been used on this site) or being 'practical' but rather my guess is that it is more in line as the idol worship thing... but I don't know enough about why Hindus wear it - other than its part of initiation? We have to be careful though, because when one takes Amrit, we also don 5 articles of faith, which others can easily try to dismiss on our part.

So as per the dictfionary definition of pragmatic, I don't think it had anything to do with it... but its just my opinion. Would you say that rejecting idol worship because God is not confined to one stone idol, but is instead in everyone... would you call that being pragmatic? I call it being spiritual. Recognizing that God IS ALL and is IN ALL so makes no sense to worship one idol - or to put it another way, why worship a part of Maya (illusion)? The stone idol is just part of Maya. Waheguru surpasses that. Maybe because he knew about this reality, that all is one, he rejected the thread because it was symbol of Hinduism which had many avatars which / polytheistic, and he believed / knew there is only ONE Creator and that ALL IS that Creator? So to wear that symbolism would go against his beliefs?? I dont know I have not read that story. But just thinking of reasons why he might reject it..
I beg to differ with you. It was not about just idol worship only but something much more important. It was all about mechanical rituals in Hinduism and Islam, the two prominent religions of India at that time. Guru Nanak laid down the foundation to change the paradigm, the thought process of the people to get rid of the fear based must perform senseless rituals hoping for some miracles of change.

So, it was about fasting, pilgrimages, Aarti performance, Animal sacrifice, the ritual of Sati, dips in Holy Waters to purify oneself, Hajj, 5 times a day prayer facing Mecca and many many more.

Harikiran ji, I do not understand what you mean by "So as per the dictfionary definition of pragmatic, I don't think it had anything to do with it... but its just my opinion". I gave you the meaning of Pragmatism from the dictionary and you seem to agreed with it.

Ik Ong Kaar is omnipresent as per Sikhi. I do not understand why you are just latching on to idol worshipping only. Guru Teg Bahadur sacrificed his life so idol worshipping Hindus could carry on with their way which again is pragmatism on his part.

I will wait for your answers to the questions asked if our Gurus practiced pragmatism or not.

Thanks & regards

Tejwant Singh
 
Last edited:

Harkiran Kaur

Leader

Writer
SPNer
Jul 21, 2012
1,393
1,907
Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh,

Firstly, it is not my definition but picked from the dictionary. I never said anywhere what you are. That is for you to define. The meaning of pragmatist is clear. If you consider yourself one among other things, it has no effect on me but only on you how you understand your Sikhi journey as per our Gurus' teachings.

I hope you understood the meaning of Janieu from the thread I posted.

I would like you to respond to the questions about pragmatism as asked to Original ji in the post above.

Thanks
I thought I did? Wasn't the question why he would reject the thread and was he being pragmatic when he did it? My answer was I don't think he was being pragmatic. I think he recognized that he was not Hindu and did not believe in Hindu polytheism, instead knowing the truth of ONEness - One God which is ALL. IN the same light as rejecting stone idols because why worship a piece of stone when God is everywhere in everything... including yourself. Or perhaps since he knew the reality of ONEness was the truth, maybe rejecting anything but, was being pragmatic (practical?). For someone who has had spiritual experiences, following the spiritual path WOULD be pragmatic, no?? (practical, proven)?

Was there another question about pragmatism?
 

chazSingh

Writer
SPNer
Feb 20, 2012
1,644
1,639
I thought I did? Wasn't the question why he would reject the thread and was he being pragmatic when he did it? My answer was I don't think he was being pragmatic. I think he recognized that he was not Hindu and did not believe in Hindu polytheism, instead knowing the truth of ONEness - One God which is ALL. IN the same light as rejecting stone idols because why worship a piece of stone when God is everywhere in everything... including yourself. Or perhaps since he knew the reality of ONEness was the truth, maybe rejecting anything but, was being pragmatic (practical?). For someone who has had spiritual experiences, following the spiritual path WOULD be pragmatic, no?? (practical, proven)?

Was there another question about pragmatism?
I like your thinking about the 'thread' ... i'm pretty sure there are so many levels beneath such an action by Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji...

On Spirituality, in a small way it is pragmatism...

BUT, Sikhi falls on Gurparsaad.

So not everything can be proven or gained by logic, reasoning, taking practical steps...and then evaluating success...

from a spiritual point of view...we cannot close our eyes, meditate and then if something out of this world occurs state that what we did was the precursor to the results...it played a part, but the 'current' that pulls you in, that's not any practical effort on your (ego) part...that is something beyond any form of pragmatism...beyond anything...

Surrender, gurparsaad, love, thirst goes beyond any form of "an approach that evaluates theories or beliefs in terms of the success of their practical application"



Just some thoughts
 

Harkiran Kaur

Leader

Writer
SPNer
Jul 21, 2012
1,393
1,907
I like your thinking about the 'thread' ... i'm pretty sure there are so many levels beneath such an action by Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji...

On Spirituality, in a small way it is pragmatism...

BUT, Sikhi falls on Gurparsaad.

So not everything can be proven or gained by logic, reasoning, taking practical steps...and then evaluating success...

from a spiritual point of view...we cannot close our eyes, meditate and then if something out of this world occurs state that what we did was the precursor to the results...it played a part, but the 'current' that pulls you in, that's not any practical effort on your (ego) part...that is something beyond any form of pragmatism...beyond anything...

Surrender, gurparsaad, love, thirst goes beyond any form of "an approach that evaluates theories or beliefs in terms of the success of their practical application"



Just some thoughts
I think what they are suggesting is that the reason he would reject the thread would be just for a practical (physical) reason... like its not doing anything practical so why wear it. They are suggesting it had nothing at all to do with anything spiritual. But I don't think so. If someone such as Guru Nanak Dev Ji, who had first hand experience of the divine (such that we go as far as to say Guru = God - look it up it's in SGGSJ) then, if Guru Nanak Dev Ji was so merged with Waheguru that there was no difference between them, then I don't think the reasoning for rejecting it had anything to do with physical practicality etc. I think it was a rejection of Hindu polytheism and superstition.

Like I said, similar to worshipping a stone idol. Why do that when God is everywhere and in everything, including yourself? You don't need that idol. You only need to go within! I think the reasoning was very much on spiritual level and not 'pragmatic' or being simply practical (physically speaking).

There is a huge difference between spirituality and superstition btw (before anyone tries to say that spirituality IS superstition... no it's not!)
 

chazSingh

Writer
SPNer
Feb 20, 2012
1,644
1,639
I think what they are suggesting is that the reason he would reject the thread would be just for a practical (physical) reason... like its not doing anything practical so why wear it. They are suggesting it had nothing at all to do with anything spiritual. But I don't think so. If someone such as Guru Nanak Dev Ji, who had first hand experience of the divine (such that we go as far as to say Guru = God - look it up it's in SGGSJ) then, if Guru Nanak Dev Ji was so merged with Waheguru that there was no difference between them, then I don't think the reasoning for rejecting it had anything to do with physical practicality etc. I think it was a rejection of Hindu polytheism and superstition.

Like I said, similar to worshipping a stone idol. Why do that when God is everywhere and in everything, including yourself? You don't need that idol. You only need to go within! I think the reasoning was very much on spiritual level and not 'pragmatic' or being simply practical (physically speaking).

There is a huge difference between spirituality and superstition btw (before anyone tries to say that spirituality IS superstition... no it's not!)
in my humble opinion, i think its both pragmatic and also deeper as you describe...Guru Ji's actions have a knack of making us step back and contemplate...seems no end to the depth of them.

spirituality definitely isn't superstition....it's alive...very alive...and real :)
it just feels a bit crazy, a little strange to begin with whilst we go through the Simran \ remembering process...its a bit funky to go from thinking we are one thing to slowly realizing we are so much more...
 

Harkiran Kaur

Leader

Writer
SPNer
Jul 21, 2012
1,393
1,907
Tejwant Singh said:
I have never mentioned that anywhere. The divisions in Sikhi were started here at SPN by Original ji and others including yourself.



I beg to differ with you. It was not about just idol worship only but something much more important. It was all about mechanical rituals in Hinduism and Islam, the two prominent religions of India at that time. Guru Nanak laid down the foundation to change the paradigm, the thought process of the people to get rid of the fear based must perform senseless rituals hoping for some miracles of change.

So, it was about fasting, pilgrimages, Aarti performance, Animal sacrifice, the ritual of Sati, dips in Holy Waters to purify oneself, Hajj, 5 times a day prayer facing Mecca and many many more.

Harikiran ji, I do not understand what you mean by "So as per the dictfionary definition of pragmatic, I don't think it had anything to do with it... but its just my opinion". I gave you the meaning of Pragmatism from the dictionary and you seem to agreed with it.

Ik Ong Kaar is omnipresent as per Sikhi. I do not understand why you are just latching on to idol worshipping only. Guru Teg Bahadur sacrificed his life so idol worshipping Hindus could carry on with their way which again is pragmatism on his part.

I will wait for your answers to the questions asked if our Gurus practiced pragmatism or not.

Tha

Idol worship was just one example. Yes God is everywhere. That's why I also mentioned the Mecca story as well.

If the meaning of pragmatism is to be practical then I don't see why someone who is spiritual can't also be pragmatic as it pertains to spirituality.

The feeling I get from you is that you don't believe that anything our gurus did had anything to do with anything spiritual or beyond this life. You have posted before actually that in your opinion there is nothing for us beyond this one life and that gurbani is only speaking about states of mind.

Well this is where we disagree. And always will. For me one mind is all there is and ego identities of these temporary bodies are false and all that exists is the one... Ik onkar wahe guru Akal purakh. To me the physical is illusion (yes proven by science) so really all there is is mind. Of the one.

So yes in that way gurbani is speaking of states of mind because the physical reality IS a state of mind of the creator.

But to think the physical world is what's real and permanent and there is nothing beyond it and this one physical life is all we have.... I have to disagree and I don't think this is what our gurus taught at all.

As for them being pragmatic.... Practical... As it pertains to spirituality yes. And also how we live our physical lives while here. But the reasons behind rejecting things like idol worship, the thread, Mecca, useless ritual etc I truly believe had more to do with the truth about reality and spirituality then just practicality as it pertains to this measly physical existence.

And I think it was you that coined the term parroter for those who do Simran. And you were also the one who started using the word pragmatic in relation to Sikhi on here. But you always used it in a way that invalidated spiritual things.

I don't see why one can't be spiritual believe in the spiritual teachings in gurbani AND be pragmatic.
 

Tejwant Singh

Mentor
Writer
SPNer
Jun 30, 2004
5,029
7,158
Henderson, NV.
Idol worship was just one example. Yes God is everywhere. That's why I also mentioned the Mecca story as well.

If the meaning of pragmatism is to be practical then I don't see why someone who is spiritual can't also be pragmatic as it pertains to spirituality.

The feeling I get from you is that you don't believe that anything our gurus did had anything to do with anything spiritual or beyond this life. You have posted before actually that in your opinion there is nothing for us beyond this one life and that gurbani is only speaking about states of mind.

Well this is where we disagree. And always will. For me one mind is all there is and ego identities of these temporary bodies are false and all that exists is the one... Ik onkar wahe guru Akal purakh. To me the physical is illusion (yes proven by science) so really all there is is mind. Of the one.

So yes in that way gurbani is speaking of states of mind because the physical reality IS a state of mind of the creator.

But to think the physical world is what's real and permanent and there is nothing beyond it and this one physical life is all we have.... I have to disagree and I don't think this is what our gurus taught at all.

As for them being pragmatic.... Practical... As it pertains to spirituality yes. And also how we live our physical lives while here. But the reasons behind rejecting things like idol worship, the thread, Mecca, useless ritual etc I truly believe had more to do with the truth about reality and spirituality then just practicality as it pertains to this measly physical existence.

And I think it was you that coined the term parroter for those who do Simran. And you were also the one who started using the word pragmatic in relation to Sikhi on here. But you always used it in a way that invalidated spiritual things.

I don't see why one can't be spiritual believe in the spiritual teachings in gurbani AND be pragmatic.

Harkiran ji,

Guru Fateh.

Those are your feelings. Mine are thoughts. I never mentioned anything about your feelings.:)
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

SPN on Facebook

...
Top