Sikhism Is Not The Same As Hinduism, Islam Or Christianity Etc | Page 2 | Sikh Philosophy Network
  • Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
    Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
    Sign up Log in

Sikhism Is Not The Same As Hinduism, Islam Or Christianity Etc

Archived_Member_19

(previously amarsanghera, account deactivated at t
SPNer
Jun 7, 2006
1,323
145
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

Dalbirk , namjap, randip jios

you go back to same fallacy of debate

while using Sikhism you take the Guru's philosophy and while considering hinduism you just pick up the worst practices.

Why don't you consider Sikhism as it is, with the jatt-mazbi divide, with the foeticide, alcoholism

behaviour of a person does not define the philosophy of a religion

please understand that there are only very few people who follow the philosophy to its essence.

Most of us neech are busy gloating over our "sticking" to rituals.

This gloating is what generates the pictures shared by Harjas ji

Let me make it clear, i do not say that Sikhism is subset of Hinduism

but i do believe that the essence of sikhi has inherited a lot from the vedic philosophy.
 

Archived_Member_19

(previously amarsanghera, account deactivated at t
SPNer
Jun 7, 2006
1,323
145
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

namjap ji

what was this link for?
 

Archived_Member_19

(previously amarsanghera, account deactivated at t
SPNer
Jun 7, 2006
1,323
145
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

namjap ji

do you agree that person can gain the ultimate goal through following Sikhi, chirst's teachings or Buddha's teaching?
 

Astroboy

ਨਾਮ ਤੇਰੇ ਕੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਲਗਾਈ (Previously namjap)
Writer
SPNer
Jul 14, 2007
4,576
1,608
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

amarsanghera Ji,

To give readers an opportunity to find out similarities (and differences) between Sikhism and various religions.
 
Jul 30, 2004
1,744
88
world
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

Gurfateh

Das saw the thread closed wheren we were been as apprant branch of Hinduism.Anyway das did not have a facility in the cyber cafe from where he could post the reply.So todays post regarding Bhai Ishmmet also das first saved in notepad and uploaded and now posted.and he missed s few points in that thread.

Coming to this thread.

Well when we go to preach Sikhism we find some resitance from Ad Dharmis ie local Mahants etc. of Jatavs and Valmikies(out castes of Hindus).They claim higher then brhamins and have self pride.But some upper caste do not belive them to be Hindus.

Just few things.

budhism was not elimanted over here by a weak idealogy ie hinduism(it was not there at that time) but due to its being athist and pro non violeance,which further weakened Indians also.

Likewise large numbers of Hindus,got converted into Sikhism during time of Ranjit Singh and brought in thier Pagan culture.they diluted Singhism like that of Akali Baba Phula Singh or Nirmala Baba Beer Singh.That Pagan cultured later lead to end of Sikh rule and Halwe Mande Ke Sikhs left us.Our fault was at that time to accept converts without converting thier pagan mentality and once they were majority then pagan things became our part.

LAstly das says that Hindu,Muslims and Christians are our offshoots.Since the universe is made,we are the only faith.

As per Japu Ji Sahib,we have Eka(lord in the form of soul/energy/purush) gat married to a trick of Mai(matter/mammon/power(enrgy in frame of time).This Mai is only the manifestation of Eka.There are three types of Sikhs/Chelas/followers of that accepted ie Producer,protecter/sustainer,destroyer.

So inspiring from God since we are made we all are Sikh of Gurubar Akal.Guru Gobind Singh Sahib wrote as Gyan Guru,Manua gur Mam Mansa Mai.God manifesting as knowledge removing darkness,Mind as manifestation of Guru God and intention as manifestation of God as Mother.

First Black/zero/kal was father/Master of the universe,from that light happened famous,that was called by the name of happeness.That created creation.

From the state of universal black whole(where due to greveity light could not escape)(either due to big bang or sturdy state) light(which being visible could let us have time,space and apprant matter) ermerged.That is to deal with state of happeining(present state as we come into the frame of time).

Pratham Kal Sabh Jagat Ko Tata Tate Tej Bhayo Vikhyata,Soi Bhavani Nam Kahaee...

So in simple words.

A person,who he learns all the thing from universe(biotic or abiotic),universe in God's visible form.And we learn from God and reason of learning is Guru and learner is Sikh.So since start till end we all are Sikhs,and we only will remain.Soory for a bit complex things.Akal Bless.
 
Nov 17, 2007
137
103
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

harjas ji, I agree with you about not hating any of the Lord's creation. But believe me Hindus are not the only victims. It goes both ways.
I can post countless pics here from '84 riots. bombay riots, gujrat riots. I can post stories from how ruthlessly Buddhists were ethnically cleaned from land of hindustan in leadership of Adi Shankarcharya. You will find victims and tyrants everywhere.
I must remind you what Arya Samaji founder has to say about Satguru Nanak,
"St. Nanak's motive was righteous but he had no scholastic knowledge at all. However, he certainly knew the language of the country, which prevails in villages. He did not at all know Vedas and other scriptures and Sanskrit. Had he known the Sanskrit language, how could he write the word nirbhaya as nirbho.... However he might have passed as a Sanskrit scholar by making those Sanskrit verses among the villagers who had never heard a word of Sanskrit before.... calumniation and praise of Vedas are found here and there in his book; for had he not done so, some one would have asked the meaning of the Vedas, and had he not been able to tell it, he would have lost his respect.... Since ignorant men are called saints, they can not know the worth of Vedas.... There were not many followers of Nanak in his time... ignorant make their teacher saint after his death.... St. Nanak was not a rich or noble man but his disciples describe him to be a great saint and a very opulent man...."

Some sikhs here are going head over heels to prove that sikhs are parts of hindus. But read the contempt in the words of arya samaji founder for Satguru Nanak.
Sikhs consider Ten masters as gurus, but president of hindu party Mr Advani considers Ten gurus as saints.
It is not about hate for hindus or any other community, but our own identity.
 
Last edited:
Nov 17, 2007
137
103
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

Harjas Kaur Khalsa asked: You have read Shri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, tell me, where does Gurbani praise shaheedi as a path to mukti?

Panna 1105
ਗਗਨ ਦਮਾਮਾ ਬਾਜਿਓ ਪਰਿਓ ਨੀਸਾਨੈ ਘਾਉ ॥ ਖੇਤੁ ਜੁ ਮਾਂਡਿਓ ਸੂਰਮਾ ਅਬ ਜੂਝਨ ਕੋ ਦਾਉ ॥੧॥
The battle-drum beats in the sky of the mind; aim is taken, and the wound is inflicted. The spiritual warriors enter the field of battle; now is the time to fight! ||1||
ਸੂਰਾ ਸੋ ਪਹਿਚਾਨੀਐ ਜੁ ਲਰੈ ਦੀਨ ਕੇ ਹੇਤ ॥ ਪੁਰਜਾ ਪੁਰਜਾ ਕਟਿ ਮਰੈ ਕਬਹੂ ਨ ਛਾਡੈ ਖੇਤੁ ॥੨॥੨॥
He alone is known as a spiritual hero, who fights in defense of religion. He may be cut apart, piece by piece, but he never leaves the field of battle. ||2||2||


panna 1412

ਜਉ ਤਉ ਪ੍ਰੇਮ ਖੇਲਣ ਕਾ ਚਾਉ ॥ ਸਿਰੁ ਧਰਿ ਤਲੀ ਗਲੀ ਮੇਰੀ ਆਉ ॥ ਇਤੁ ਮਾਰਗਿ ਪੈਰੁ ਧਰੀਜੈ ॥ ਸਿਰੁ ਦੀਜੈ ਕਾਣਿ ਨ ਕੀਜੈ ॥੨੦॥
If you desire to play this game of love with Me, then step onto My Path with your head in hand. When you place your feet on this Path, give Me your head, and do not pay any attention to public opinion. ||20||

panna 579

ਮਰਣੁ ਨ ਮੰਦਾ ਲੋਕਾ ਆਖੀਐ ਜੇ ਕੋਈ ਮਰਿ ਜਾਣੈ ॥੨॥
Death would not be called bad, O people, if one knew how to truly die. ||2||
ਮਰਣੁ ਮੁਣਸਾ ਸੂਰਿਆ ਹਕੁ ਹੈ ਜੋ ਹੋਇ ਮਰਨਿ ਪਰਵਾਣੋ ॥
The death of brave heroes is blessed, if it is approved by God.
ਸੂਰੇ ਸੇਈ ਆਗੈ ਆਖੀਅਹਿ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਾਵਹਿ ਸਾਚੀ ਮਾਣੋ ॥
They alone are acclaimed as brave warriors in the world hereafter, who receive true honor in the Court of the Lord.
ਦਰਗਹ ਮਾਣੁ ਪਾਵਹਿ ਪਤਿ ਸਿਉ ਜਾਵਹਿ ਆਗੈ ਦੂਖੁ ਨ ਲਾਗੈ ॥
They are honored in the Court of the Lord; they depart with honor, and they do not suffer pain in the world hereafter.
ਕਰਿ ਏਕੁ ਧਿਆਵਹਿ ਤਾਂ ਫਲੁ ਪਾਵਹਿ ਜਿਤੁ ਸੇਵਿਐ ਭਉ ਭਾਗੈ ॥
They meditate on the One Lord, and obtain the fruits of their rewards. Serving the Lord, their fear is dispelled.
ਊਚਾ ਨਹੀ ਕਹਣਾ ਮਨ ਮਹਿ ਰਹਣਾ ਆਪੇ ਜਾਣੈ ਜਾਣੋ ॥
Do not indulge in egotism, and dwell within your own mind; the Knower Himself knows everything.
ਮਰਣੁ ਮੁਣਸਾਂ ਸੂਰਿਆ ਹਕੁ ਹੈ ਜੋ ਹੋਇ ਮਰਹਿ ਪਰਵਾਣੋ ॥੩॥
The death of brave heroes is blessed, if it is approved by God. ||3||


panna 1102

ਪਹਿਲਾ ਮਰਣੁ ਕਬੂਲਿ ਜੀਵਣ ਕੀ ਛਡਿ ਆਸ ॥
First, accept death, and give up any hope of life.
ਹੋਹੁ ਸਭਨਾ ਕੀ ਰੇਣੁਕਾ ਤਉ ਆਉ ਹਮਾਰੈ ਪਾਸਿ ॥੧॥
Become the dust of the feet of all, and then, you may come to me. ||1||

who care about boat of mukti, when you are imbued in love of Lord.

For a Sikh this is the pre-condition, demand of complete self-surrender and humility, offering one’s own life for common good without any fear or hesitation.


panna 534
ਰਾਜੁ ਨ ਚਾਹਉ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਚਾਹਉ ਮਨਿ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਿ ਚਰਨ ਕਮਲਾਰੇ ॥
I do not seek power, and I do not seek liberation. My mind is in love with Your Lotus Feet.
 

Randip Singh

Writer
Historian
SPNer
May 25, 2005
2,936
2,948
51
United Kingdom
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

Dalbirk , namjap, randip jios

you go back to same fallacy of debate

while using Sikhism you take the Guru's philosophy and while considering hinduism you just pick up the worst practices.

Why don't you consider Sikhism as it is, with the jatt-mazbi divide, with the foeticide, alcoholism

behaviour of a person does not define the philosophy of a religion

please understand that there are only very few people who follow the philosophy to its essence.

Most of us neech are busy gloating over our "sticking" to rituals.

This gloating is what generates the pictures shared by Harjas ji

Let me make it clear, i do not say that Sikhism is subset of Hinduism

but i do believe that the essence of sikhi has inherited a lot from the vedic philosophy.

If Kabir ji as a devout Vaishnav states that a woman is a "Cobra", then do you agree that is not compatible with Sikhi?

The Guru'ssought Truth in all faiths. They took elements of that Truth compatable with there own thoughts (which we term as "Sikh"), and compiled it in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib ji. Just because they took elemnts of that faith which they thought truthful, it does not mean they followed or acceppted that faith. Guru Nanak going to Mecca does not mean he is a Muslim.

Get my point!

Guru's were followers of Truth, and Bani is Truth!
 

Randip Singh

Writer
Historian
SPNer
May 25, 2005
2,936
2,948
51
United Kingdom
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

I can't seem to edit my post but I was going to add, I see Sikhi'sparallel's with many faith's,

Jesus's emphasis on Love

Mohammeds emphasis on discipline

Buddha's emphasis on gaining knowledge

Krishna's emphasis on duty

Moses emphahasis on freedom

but Sikhi is not these faiths.
 

Archived_Member_19

(previously amarsanghera, account deactivated at t
SPNer
Jun 7, 2006
1,323
145
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

<<Guru's were followers of Truth, and Bani is Truth!>>

Randip ji

i agree

but truth us not something that changes..

each philosophy contains it.

I hope you are not saying that Sikhism is the only way to know TRUTH.
 

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)
SPNer
Jun 17, 2004
14,500
19,181
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

I can't seem to edit my post but I was going to add, I see Sikhi'sparallel's with many faith's,

Jesus's emphasis on Love

Mohammeds emphasis on discipline

Buddha's emphasis on gaining knowledge

Krishna's emphasis on duty

Moses emphahasis on freedom

but Sikhi is not these faiths.
Yes, it is simple logic, Randip ji.
 
Feb 15, 2006
512
18
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

I see my posts are now being deleted, and threads I participate on being closed, so I am unable to answer fully the many points and objections raised, per your wishes.

I will answer this in response to Lalihayer ji. The question was "Where in Gurbani is shaheedi praised as a path to mukti, liberation?"

ਮਰਣੁ ਮੁਣਸਾ ਸੂਰਿਆ ਹਕੁ ਹੈ ਜੋ ਹੋਇ ਮਰਨਿ ਪਰਵਾਣੋ ॥
The death of brave heroes is blessed, if it is approved by God.
ਸੂਰੇ ਸੇਈ ਆਗੈ ਆਖੀਅਹਿ ਦਰਗਹ ਪਾਵਹਿ ਸਾਚੀ ਮਾਣੋ ॥
They alone are acclaimed as brave warriors in the world hereafter, who receive true honor in the Court of the Lord.

This tuuk of Gurbani talks about how noble and righteous it is for a warrior to defend Dharma. It does not say, as in jihadi world-view that a shaheed becomes mukti. The reason for mentioning this was in context of very real issues within Khalistani communities which praise dying in combat as a path to obtain mukti in the Islamic jihadist conception. Any in-depth study of Nanakian philosophy will show that even japping Naam alone is not the path to mukti, but discipleship to Satguru, Naam jap, kirtan, dasvandh, seva, etc. In other words, the path to mukti is practicing the path of becoming righteous itself, not specifically of throwing handgrenades and getting killed by police forces. And the only reason for mentioning this, is, as I have tried to say, such jihadi political views are commonly (At least in USA) being promoted as true path to mukti. Hence many Gurdwaras are dedicated to shaheeds with photos of them. This is what the kids are emulating, without even learning anything about becoming a righteous person or protecting the innocent. There is not even talk about defending the innocent, only talk about defending Sikh self-interests, politically, economically, socially, and obtaining retaliation for 1984 and Delhi Riots.

So from these mis-conceptions about jihadi shaheedi, I do not see any parallel with Gurbani tuuks which praise a "spiritual hero." To be honored in the Court of the Lord is not the same as becoming mukta. Authentic spiritual righteousness, for one thing, has got to be more responsible of the public safety. Waging war on any public is not even the same as an Army fighting an Army. And for such designation as armed militants irresponsibly targeting a "Hindu" population in general, or using weapons such as machine guns, grenades and bombs where accuracy is not guaranteed, no longer becomes a "Dharmic" struggle, but just another form of political violence rightly deemed by the public as "terrorism."

And I assure you, this is not what Guru vak intended. These world-views are not a boat of mukti, they are the opposite of mukti.
 
Feb 15, 2006
512
18
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

harjas ji, I agree with you about not hating any of the Lord's creation. But believe me Hindus are not the only victims. It goes both ways. I can post countless pics here from '84 riots. bombay riots, gujrat riots. I can post stories from how ruthlessly Buddhists were ethnically cleaned from land of hindustan in leadership of Adi Shankarcharya. You will find victims and tyrants everywhere. I must remind you what Arya Samaji founder has to say about Satguru Nanak, "St. Nanak's motive was righteous but he had no scholastic knowledge at all. However, he certainly knew the language of the country, which prevails in villages. He did not at all know Vedas and other scriptures and Sanskrit. Had he known the Sanskrit language, how could he write the word nirbhaya as nirbho.... However he might have passed as a Sanskrit scholar by making those Sanskrit verses among the villagers who had never heard a word of Sanskrit before.... calumniation and praise of Vedas are found here and there in his book; for had he not done so, some one would have asked the meaning of the Vedas, and had he not been able to tell it, he would have lost his respect.... Since ignorant men are called saints, they can not know the worth of Vedas.... There were not many followers of Nanak in his time... ignorant make their teacher saint after his death.... St. Nanak was not a rich or noble man but his disciples describe him to be a great saint and a very opulent man...."

Some sikhs here are going head over heels to prove that sikhs are parts of hindus. But read the contempt in the words of arya samaji founder for Satguru Nanak.
Sikhs consider Ten masters as gurus, but president of hindu party Mr Advani considers Ten gurus as saints. It is not about hate for hindus or any other community, but our own identity.
I have been involved in Khalistani communities for quite some time. The issue is first, why do Sikhs keep interpreting malicious political oppresion of secular Congress Party as "Acts of ALL Hindus?" Founder of Arya Samaj is not voice of Hindus. He speaks for Arya Samaj. It is the illusion of Singh Sabha to paint their political opponents into corner as representative of entire Hindu Panth. Why do we continue this deceit?

Think about it. Since the truth is, despite RSS-BJP promoting ethnic cleansing of Muslims in Gujarat riots, which I have also spoken against publically, RSS was still actively risking their own safety to save Sikh lives during time of gallughara. So if we would have integrity with the facts, how can we say "Hindu's" in general acted out a pogrom of genocide on the Sikhs when "Hindu's" were actively saving them?


Lalihayerji, it is precisely this imprecision which keeps lumping together all political groups such as Arya Samaj and RSS as representative of "Hindu" religion, and targeting the Hindu community as a whole for the kind of abuses of language, denigration of religious value and equality, even threatening of retaliatory violence so prevalent in Khalistani communities today. And I'm telling you, these attitudes will lead to catastrophe and evil acts in the future. Because they are based on untruths. Dark thoughts will always give birth to dark deeds.

And I don't understand why the Sikh community continues to ignore such a volatile issue. Why is the general mainstream tacitly condoning and approving the worst attitudes of self-segregation and separatism and ignoring the terroristic implications of such divisions?
Minority segments in the Sikh population are actively praising and promoting terrorist acts as means to an end of achieving Sikh independance, nationhood and Khalistan. Can we afford to be blind to the ramifications of what that means for India? For innocent Hindu populations? What kind of nationhood are we taking about that actively praises collaboration with radical elements of Al Qaeda in Pakistan and war with India?

It is treason. And I guarantee this kind of talk, these kind of attitudes will lead to an even greater intelligence forces persecution of Sikh communities in the future, not only in India, but all over the western world.



Who will lose? And the answer is, everybody. And for what? For some paranoia of being equated as having a Vedantic philosophy and spiritual relationship with overall Hinduism which is so broad as to be powerless to alter Sikh teaching? Sikh teaching begins and ends with Guru Sahib. Don't you think that was the intention of Guru Nanak to bring harmony between Hindu's and Muslims by accepting chelas from both communities and preaching message of tolerance and brotherhood? How in the world did this get shifted into turning deaf ear to political separatism of terrorist organizations? Because that's what has happened, what is happening. While everyone argues independant nationhood, and continues to politically blame Hindu's as a religious community spiritually inferior and unworthy of association, no one is talking about the fanatics among us, and how they are interpreting these issues.

For the record, Sikhism has developed into a separate sect, but to be honest, not on enough points of departure from Hindu philosophy to be considered a separate religion. But even if you do define Sikhism as entirely different religion, why do people continue to deny Sikhism has powerful orientation from within Vedic conceptions of God, universe, soul and salvation? And why, when we open this can of worms, and the spirit of anti-Hinduism raises it's head, are we not addressing that hostility between Sikh and Hindu communities, because it is the very heart of serious problems and violence today.

In other words, if people really believe in their heart of hearts that Sikhism has nothing to do with Hinduism and Hindu culture, why get upset about the fact other people will make that association? Why the expression of hostility and ridicule to further ostracize and alienate Hindu-Sikh divide? And do we hear never-ending political blame for anti-Sikh violence as being a "guilt of ALL HINDUS?"



There is very legitimately within the Sikh Panth, a segment of Sikhs which consider themselves sanatan. And they have a valid historical lineage to that claim. How are they showing "disrespect for independant Sikh identity" not to agree with the Tat Khalsa mindset? Do you really think the answer is censorship and ostracism? I have warned you how serious this philosophy of "Sikh independance from India" is and the extremist form it is taking. Yet all these discussions continue to make these blanket and irresponsible claims, which really hinge, not on pride in independant identity, but on hostility towards Hinduism, Hindu population in general, and the nation of India.

Be honest, can Sikhs who have made such political recovery in India today since 1984 really afford to fan the flames of separatism which are blazing among Khalistanis? In a post 9-11 era where western governments have zero tolerance for jihadis, can we be so blind to the direction extremist Sikhs are taking in the name of separate identity? Can you imagine what the backlash against Sikhs will be with Dal Khalsa publically supporting Pakistani jihadis?

What's the harm in showing respect and tolerance to the Vedic ideology in Gurbani? What's the harm in praising the good things in Hindu religion? What's the harm in acknowledging a brotherhood between Sikhs and Hindus? And the only harm I can imagine stems from oppositional political goals and nothing to do with any kind of commonality in the spiritual teachings. Instead of building bridges, Sikhism is stuck in the post British colonial mentality of agitiating for Sikh rights and Sikh separatism, which is causing the Sikh community incalculable harm and untold deaths.

Is this really a time to stubbornly go on about separate Sikh identity? With SAD A supporting Pakistani jihadis, and bomb blasts in India mounting, this is taking a decidedly sour turn. It is better for Sikhs to have no independant identity at all than to be associated in the public mind with Al Qaeda. This political manuvering has gotten ridiculous. Sikhs ARE independant. And Hinduism IS all-inclusive. WHY in the world is that some kind of monster to everyone? Would you rather Hindu India targeted Sikhs instead of accepting them as part of themselves? Just to have relationship to Hindu teachings does not mean you lose your identity as Sikhs of Guru Nanak. It means you gain relationship and brotherhood within a context of nationhood with India. And that veer jis and bhain jis is the survival of Sikhism. The other road is sheer destruction.



And that is the purpose of my posts. I fear a disastrous future if we don't try and turn this thing around now. Ideological separatism, exclusivism, nurturing of grievances and blame, that was the politics that gave rise to the Nazi party. And what is shocking to me, the extremist philosophy within Sikhism is actually the mainstream philosophy. The majority of Sikhs actually do think this way and support, if not directly, then indirectly, the spirit and message of these Khalistani separatist movements. And that is tantamount to complicity with those who glorify acts of terrorist violence against "ALL Hindus."

Because, who are Khalistanis fighting against? Is it oppressors? No. Anyone who wants to take out KPS Gill or Jagdish Tytler will have no opposition from me. That would be a Dharmic action, just as the killing of CM Beant Singh was. But the rhetoric is agitation against the Indian state to create instability and apprehension; against ALL Hindus in general, as a general population. The fight is couched in political terms, not against a specific Army of an oppressor, but against people of an ostracized religion in the name of self-rule.

This talk, this mindset, this ideology of separatism which leads to despising of differences in human beings, I cannot support. If Sikh militants were truly honest, and wanted to wage a war against oppressors from the gallughara, it would have nothing to do with Hindus. It would address directly certain leaders of the political Congress Party who instigated riots and planned Operation Bluestar and the Sikh Punjab Police forces. But this isn't a "jihad" against oppressors. It is the advocacy of political violence for the political objective of seceding from the Indian state. And as such it is a small movement doomed to failure, and doomed to create negative associations in the public mind with Sikhism and Al Qaeda and create a future of violence and rejection towards Sikhs.

And all for what? Because of refusal to acknowledge brotherhood between Sikhism and Hinduism and sincere valuation and respect for Hindu people and Indian state? If Guru Nanak Dev Ji were in physical form now, do you think he would speak against Hindus the way Sikh communities are doing? Do you think He would be promoting harmony and unity and protection AGAINST violence and injustice? The Khalsa raised the sword AGAINST violence as a protection. What would the Khalsa be raising it's sword for now? For another political morcha of separatism which alienates and frightens the Indian state and leads to another gallughara? Who can call this "identity" and "nationhood?" It is suicide.


But believe me Hindus are not the only victims. It goes both ways.
This is the attitude I keep talking about. The Sikh community isn't shunning mindless acts of terrorist violence against innocents. Instead it is condoning terrorist violence such as the airline bombing as some form of justified retribution and deserved act. Sikhism is not a philosophy of retaliatory violence. It's a Dharmic religion of self-defense. The act, for example, of bombing an airplane, from a safe distance, which is full of non-combatants is not a military action or an act with any spiritual justification. It's an act of cowardly terrorism. If cowardly evil people attacked and killed innocent Sikhs, how would a retaliatory bombing of innocents revenge anyone? It doesn't. It only brings Sikhs who do and defend such acts down to the level of the evil and the guilty. On this level, there is no such thing as Hindus, and no such thing as Sikhs. Everyone is a child of God. And those who are criminals who promote and act out evil deeds with be condemned and punished by the God, no matter who praises them. Retaliation, blood for blood, targeting and killing of innocents is the death of Sikh identity.

Kill the evil to protect the innocent, that is the highest Dharmic duty. Kill and justify killing of innocents, and you become the evil. People should bow their heads in shame that any innocents were harmed in any militant action, and not only Sikh innocents, let alone deliberately targeted. This is the "us against them" separatism pervasive in the community today, which only mourns it's own, which blindly and uncritically defends actions within it's own community for it's own benefit regardless of who is harmed. This isn't a spiritual message. Scapegoating and targeting anyone is not a spiritual message.

Sikhs should be promoting JUSTICE for ALL victims of violence, a spiritual equality of ALL human beings without targeting one particular religion for insult and blame; instead of praising a sectarian divide that threatens to cause even more mindless violence. With all the money and emotion poured into militant Khalistani causes, why don't we see even one orphanage to bless and support all the victims of mindless violence, Hindu, Muslim and Sikh alike? We don't, because it isn't a "spiritual movement." Therefore spiritual people should recoil from it, and from all low-minded hostile attitudes of separatism and delusions of spiritual supremacy. That is the meaning behind: "I am not a Muslim. I am not a Hindu." It is the universality of the human soul and acceptance of timeless spiritual truths. You can't be one with the One God if you can't even be one with your neighbor. That's the fundamental problem with an Abrahamic conception of a God who divides against all other forms of belief. Pantheistic oneness is unity. Abrahamic monotheism is an endless war fighting politically for sole and supreme identity among religious faiths.

YouTube - Air India 182 - Trailer


~Bhul chak maaf
 

dalsingh

SPNer
Jun 13, 2006
1,064
233
London
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

SAD supporting Pakistani jihadis? This is the first I've heard of this. Can you give us some supporting evidence please Harjas?
 

Archived_Member_19

(previously amarsanghera, account deactivated at t
SPNer
Jun 7, 2006
1,323
145
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

harjas ji

its time people consider of a world without a religion.

and if they reach out, they will find Sikhi is just another name of spiritual humanism.
 
Feb 15, 2006
512
18
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

SAD supporting Pakistani jihadis? This is the first I've heard of this. Can you give us some supporting evidence please Harjas?
I already posted evidence with pictures and videos but the post was deleted for unspecified reasons.


Sad(A) since it's inception has been very careful to support independant state of Khalistan through peaceful means. However, the largest supporters of SAD(A) are not in Punjab where they have to worry about police and public opinion, and you do not see or hear the same kind of restraint. Certain elements within SAD(A), Dal Khalsa, and Shiromani Khalsa Dal are former members of militant organizations, which still have a base in Pakistan. What we are seeing in the West is public support of unstable elements within Pakistan, and Pakistani military interests over the survival interests of India, which realistically would destroy Punjab. The links between jihadi violence and Sikh militancy have always existed and this should be honestly addressed by the mainstream Sikh community. Support for radical political positions ties directly with issues of Sikh independance, repudiation of any association or any respect for Hinduism, Hindu culture and Hindu state. You can't have attitudes of hostility which are a primary part of a community's political identity without seeing a connection to attitudes of violence against the presumed enemy.

When violence does occur, it's not even believable that groups with stated agendas of violence are not involved. Even if the vocal elements are in the minority, the cause for concern is that the Sikh majority continues to turn a blind eye and justify the attitudes and rhetoric of hostility to Hindus, treasonous collaboration with Pakistan, and agitation for an independant Sikh state. I'm sorry if you can't see that, it's as plain as writing on the wall. And as I said, in some diaspora communities it isn't even a minority position.

While I do still have sympathy for militancy as a Dharmic response to political oppression, there is a limit to an appropriate response. I think the Sikh community as a whole is glorifying the violence of the past and exaggerating the Sikh-Hindu divide for a manipulated separatist agenda. We don't have any justification for violence or treasonous attacks against Hindu populations, nor are there credible justifications for support of Pakistani jihadis. This political manipulation is a gross distortion of Sikhism. And I believe it is firmly tied to the current attitudes of hostility and opposition to anything Hindu. This is not how anybody will create Khalistan. It's how people will create another Gallughara. And if we're honest and evaluate all the elements preceding the violence of the Indian state, there were a number of provoking factors and incidents which pitted Sikhs against Hindus. If people don't take responsibility for the causes of communal violence and strife, we're just going to keep justifying and repeating the same mistakes and go down that same path again. Sikhs weren't even noticed internationally during the 1980's and 1990's gallughara. What will happen if glorification of violence gets established in the public mind with incidents of collaboration with jihadi militant groups such as the Indian bombings? Sikhs won't have any support at all. So why are Sikh communities praising the rhetoric of radical Khalistanis? Why continue to praise the rhetoric of independant nationhood and separate identity? This very talk about separatism, independance, disrespect for anything Hindu in Sikhism is volatile and promotes unease and suspicion by Indian government police and intelligence agencies. It also justifies violent means and encourages the fanatics among us. What good can come of it?


YouTube - Sikhs welcomes Pakistan decision to bring Anand Karaj Act

YouTube - Khalistan Speech June 3rd June 2007 Trafalgour Square London

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

YouTube - Sikh Muslim Brotherhood Agaisnt Evil Hindu India

YouTube - Broadcast Yourself.

YouTube - 17 BOMB BLASTS ROCK AHMEDABAD,45 DEAD: more Islamic TERROR

YouTube - Punjab: Jihadi-Khalistani link likely

YouTube - Sikh Muslim Brotherhood Agianst Evil Hindu India


The Sikh Times - News and Analysis - The Ghost of Khalistan

ISI-backed Sikh militancy back, warns IB


~Bhul chak maaf
 
Feb 15, 2006
512
18
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

harjas ji

its time people consider of a world without a religion.

and if they reach out, they will find Sikhi is just another name of spiritual humanism.
The Sikh community in diaspora has confused spirituality with violent politics of separatism. And those politics were the likely precipitant for the attack in 1984 and subsequent gallughara. While this can't in any way excuse the horrific and unjust response by the government of India against the Sikhs, it can't be overlooked either, that Sikhs themselves were provoking the Indian state with talk of independant identity, armed rallies and resistence. It isn't much different from today where you see dera sacha sauda premis beating or killing a Sikh... but you find that Sikh was also part of an armed agitation. So honestly, we have to say a certain response from the Sikh Panth is one of provocation. And this alone is a large cause of unrest. Consider that 1978 Amritsar attack by sant Nirankaris against Sikhs would not have occured if Sikhs had not responded to deliberate provocations of Gurbachana by marching with swords and shields. The response received was a gunfight. How could they win? So in hindsight, it was a foolish response, and it resulted in tragedy for the Sikhs. And it was this incident which led to the formation of Babbar Khalsa International, which now has main headquarters in Pakistan and known collaboration with jihadis. Is there anything logical in this history of events which has anything to do with a spiritual message?

It is not possible for these kind of extremist political responses to be in harmony with any kind of spiritual teaching. And the fact is, if you backtrack from the violent political actions, you find violent beliefs and attitudes which are behind them. And this is the point, that Sikhism as a religious identity has defined itself in terms of Hindu injustices, Hindu weaknesses, Hindu failure. So the Sikh identity is pitched as fighting against the Hindu identity. Sadly, comments of vulgar denigration and glorification of violence against Hindus, was the primary reason why I lost faith in Khalistanis and began to reconsider a world-view besides the one they promote.

It can't be possible that xyz former terrorist is innocent, when the very attitudes of the community largely agree with his alleged terrorist actions, when the actions are justified, and when the victims are demonized as part of some brahmin conspiracy of the evil Indian state. That is simply propaganda worthy of Hitler to demonize and scapegoat populations of people. I invite people to look very closely at this agitation for separate Sikh political identity couched in the name of religion, because it is nothing more than advocacy of violence, of violent means to secede from the Indian state and establish an independant Sikh homeland. It is nothing more than jihadi religion which promotes shaheedi as a means to achieve mukti. It is nothing more than radical Islamic definitions of a One True God and a One True Faith. It is nothing more than an imposed Abrahamic conception which makes every other religion and people in the world inferior to Sikhism, as it proclaims falsely that Sikhism is the only boat of mukti, not unlike jihadis. It is nothing more than a political philosophy of ethnocentric self-promotion and intolerance in the name of a spiritual teaching.

Any authentic spiritual teaching unites and doesn't divide. It embraces commonalities and doesn't despise differences. It promotes honesty and justice and not self-promoting political violence. It encourages a brotherhood of all mankind and all religions and does not hide behind a shield of separation. Any authentic spirituality recognizes that ultimately every human being is One with the Oneness which is an All-pervading pantheistic harmony of all that exists. It has maturity and ease of heart, respect and tolerance. True spirituality is all embracing and not hostile and fanatical. True spirituality has no name of any particular religion because the highest truths are universal and belong to all mankind. That is why there are saints of all religions.



Guru Nanak Dev Ji belongs to the whole world. To be a chela, a sikh of Guruji, is not to be a member of an elite club, or a nationalistic interest, or a radical political view against India, or a hostility which denigrates Hinduism, or a rejection of people who don't wear the same clothes, or a devaluing of the sincerity of people who cut hair and eat meat, or an authoritarian clique of the influential, or a cultural belongingness of only Punjabis.

Sikhism is bigger than the limited defintions of modern-day Sikhs. And it is truly sanatan in character. There are in fact, holy teachings within Hinduism. And the very highest and holiest universal truths are expounded and taught in Gurbani, for the purpose of uniting Hindu India with an oppressor like Islamic invaders and elevating the example of the best Hindu saints with the best Sufi saints, for one purpose...to teach that God is love. And it was this love of God which is a sword and shield around the innocent. It can never be corrupted by petty politics. Because it will defend the dignity of every human being regardless of political affiliation, ethnicity or religion. Anytime a spiritual person defends the innocent, he is praising the God of justice and love. Anytime a person defends evil actions while demonizing another human being, he is condemning himself and his creed.


Spirituality has no independant identity separate from the One God pervading all creation. The spiritual identity rests in God and in good deeds.


ਹੋਹੁ ਨਿਮਾਣਾ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੂ ਅਗੈ ਮਤ ਕਿਛੁ ਆਪੁ ਲਖਾਵਹੇ ॥
hohu nimaanaa sathiguroo agai math kishh aap lakhaavehae ||
So be humble, and surrender to the True Guru; do not attach your identity to your ego.

ਆਪਣੈ ਅਹੰਕਾਰਿ ਜਗਤੁ ਜਲਿਆ ਮਤ ਤੂੰ ਆਪਣਾ ਆਪੁ ਗਵਾਵਹੇ ॥
aapanai ahankaar jagath jaliaa math thoon aapanaa aap gavaavehae ||
The world is consumed by ego and self-identity; see this, lest you lose your own self as well.
~SGGS Ji p. 441​

ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਪ੍ਰੀਤਿ ਸਿਉ ਇਕੁ ਸਹਜੁ ਉਪਜਿਆ ਵੇਖੁ ਜੈਸੀ ਭਗਤਿ ਬਨੀ ॥
gobindh preeth sio eik sehaj oupajiaa vaekh jaisee bhagath banee ||
A divine peace wells up from God's Love; behold, it comes from devotional worship.

ਆਪ ਸੇਤੀ ਆਪੁ ਖਾਇਆ ਤਾ ਮਨੁ ਨਿਰਮਲੁ ਹੋਆ ਜੋਤੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਸਮਈ ॥੨॥
aap saethee aap khaaeiaa thaa man niramal hoaa jothee joth samee ||2||
When my identity consumed my identical identity, then my mind became immaculately pure, and my light was blended with the Divine Light. ||2||
~SGGS Ji p. 490​


~bhul chak maaf
 

spnadmin

1947-2014 (Archived)
SPNer
Jun 17, 2004
14,500
19,181
Re: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism..or Islam, .....or Christianity.....etc

Harjas ji

A plea for relevance.

For the record, Sikhism has developed into a separate sect, but to be honest, not on enough points of departure from Hindu philosophy to be considered a separate religion. But even if you do define Sikhism as entirely different religion, why do people continue to deny Sikhism has powerful orientation from within Vedic conceptions of God, universe, soul and salvation? And why, when we open this can of worms, and the spirit of anti-Hinduism raises it's head, are we not addressing that hostility between Sikh and Hindu communities, because it is the very heart of serious problems and violence today. (quote from Post 35)

What is your basis in logic (not in emotion and inference based on loose associations) that causes you to correlate adherence to Sikh identity and violence against Hindus?

While I do still have sympathy for militancy as a Dharmic response to political oppression, there is a limit to an appropriate response. I think the Sikh community as a whole is glorifying the violence of the past and exaggerating the Sikh-Hindu divide for a manipulated separatist agenda. We don't have any justification for violence or treasonous attacks against Hindu populations, nor are there credible justifications for support of Pakistani jihadis. This political manipulation is a gross distortion of Sikhism. And I believe it is firmly tied to the current attitudes of hostility and opposition to anything Hindu. This is not how anybody will create Khalistan. It's how people will create another Gallughara. And if we're honest and evaluate all the elements preceding the violence of the Indian state, there were a number of provoking factors and incidents which pitted Sikhs against Hindus. If people don't take responsibility for the causes of communal violence and strife, we're just going to keep justifying and repeating the same mistakes and go down that same path again. Sikhs weren't even noticed internationally during the 1980's and 1990's gallughara. What will happen if glorification of violence gets established in the public mind with incidents of collaboration with jihadi militant groups such as the Indian bombings? Sikhs won't have any support at all. So why are SikhSikhism is volatile and promotes unease and suspicion by Indian government police and intelligence agencies. It also justifies violent means and encourages the fanatics among us. What good can come of it? communities praising the rhetoric of radical Khalistanis? Why continue to praise the rhetoric of independant nationhood and separate identity? Why continue to praise the rhetoric of independant nationhood and separate identity? This very talk about separatism, independance, disrespect for anything Hindu in Sikhism is volatile and promotes unease and suspicion by Indian government police and intelligence agencies. It also justifies violent means and encourages the fanatics among us. What good can come of it?

Do we have hard empirical facts and figures to support your claims. What percentage of the Sikh community worldwide subscribes to armed oppression of Hindus and jihadi activity? or does so on the basis of their belief in Sikh identity? What is the incidence? What is the prevalence? Please provide more than your suspicions.

It can't be possible that xyz former terrorist is innocent, when the very attitudes of the community largely agree with his alleged terrorist actions, when the actions are justified, and when the victims are demonized as part of some brahmin conspiracy of the evil Indian state. That is simply propaganda worthy of Hitler to demonize and scapegoat populations of people. I invite people to look very closely at this agitation for separate Sikh political identity couched in the name of religion, because it is nothing more than advocacy of violence, of violent means to secede from the Indian state and establish an independant Sikh homeland. It is nothing more than jihadi religion which promotes shaheedi as a means to achieve mukti. It is nothing more than radical Islamic definitions of a One True God and a One True Faith. It is nothing more than an imposed Abrahamic conception which makes every other religion and people in the world inferior to Sikhism, as it proclaims falsely that Sikhism is the only boat of mukti, not unlike jihadis. It is nothing more than a political philosophy of ethnocentric self-promotion and intolerance in the name of a spiritual teaching. (quoted from post 39)


Please explain to the forum how you have arrived at these conclusions - for they are conclusions and not so far drawn from evidence but from your personal perceptions. Have you personally conducted a sufficiently broad investigation using a representative cross-section of the worldwide Sikh community, perhaps by the use of surveys and analysis of print media, to draw any of the conclusions in the paragraph above. I am not convinced that YouTube videos are objective sources of evidence.

The Sikh community in diaspora has confused spirituality with violent politics of separatism. And those politics were the likely precipitant for the attack in 1984 and subsequent gallughara. While this can't in any way excuse the horrific and unjust response by the government of India against the Sikhs, it can't be overlooked either, that Sikhs themselves were provoking the Indian state with talk of independant identity, armed rallies and resistence. It isn't much different from today where you see dera sacha sauda premis beating or killing a Sikh... but you find that Sikh was also part of an armed agitation. So honestly, we have to say a certain response from the Sikh Panth is one of provocation. And this alone is a large cause of unrest. Consider that 1978 Amritsar attack by sant Nirankaris against Sikhs would not have occured if Sikhs had not responded to deliberate provocations of Gurbachana by marching with swords and shields. The response received was a gunfight. How could they win? So in hindsight, it was a foolish response, and it resulted in tragedy for the Sikhs. And it was this incident which led to the formation of Babbar Khalsa International, which now has main headquarters in Pakistan and known collaboration with jihadis. Is there anything logical in this history of events which has anything to do with a spiritual message (also quoted from post 39)

I have not, in my limited experience, seen or heard any activity aiming in the direction of armed response or hostility toward Hindus or the government of India at the two gurdwaras that I attend. Perhaps they are meeting secretly in remote areas, or in bunkers disguised as storage facilities and warehouses on the outskirts of the city. Perhaps they do not want me to know about it. I might spill the beans. In fact Khalistan is never discussed there either.

Whether they are or they are not violently predisposed toward Hindus is irrelevant in this discussion. What is the logical argument that leads to the conclusion: Sikhism is not the same as Hinduism (title of the thread we are now looking at) can be reasonably associated with separatism, jihadism, violence, and nazism? Please provide empirical evidence and logical arguments.
 

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.

Featured Shabad Vichaar

ਗਉੜੀ ਮਹੱਲਾ ॥੫॥ Raag Gauri | Guru Granth Sahib 199

ਗਰੀਬਾ ਊਪਰਿ ਜਿ ਖਿੰਜੈ ਦਾੜੀ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਸ ਅਗਨਿ ਮਹਿ ਸਾੜੀ ॥੧॥ ਪੂਰਾ ਨਿਆਉ ਕਰੇ ਕਰਤਾਰੁ ਅਪੁਨੇ ਦਾਸ ਕਉ ਰਾਖਨਹਾਰ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

ਆਦਿ ਜੁਗਾਦਿ ਪਰਗਟੀ...

SPN on Facebook

...
Top