Sikhism Pledge / ਸਿੱਖੀ ਦੀ ਕਸਮ | SIKH PHILOSOPHY NETWORK
  • Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
    Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
    Sign up Log in

Sikhism Pledge / ਸਿੱਖੀ ਦੀ ਕਸਮ

What are your thoughts on Sikhism Pledge?

  • 1. I believe it is worthwhile to have one and I like it as worded.

    Votes: 3 37.5%
  • 2. I believe it is worthwhile to have one, but we need to revise wording and I have posted suggestio

    Votes: 1 12.5%
  • 3. I do not believe we should have one, the status-quo is fine.

    Votes: 3 37.5%
  • 4. Other and I have posted my comments or suggestions.

    Votes: 1 12.5%

  • Total voters
    8

Ambarsaria

ੴ / Ik▫oaʼnkār
Writer
SPNer
Dec 21, 2010
3,380
5,687
I want spner’s opinion on this topic. The rationale framework is as follows”

WHY: We as human beings and Sikhs view each other differently. Even within Sikhs there are divisions of so called hardliners, non-practicing, sehajdhari, and many other varieties. History tells us that when a Sikh, no matter how complete or incomplete one is, faces adversity a simple wearing of a Kara or any other Kakkar can cause one to be facing adversity. No one is going to check a Sikh’s certificate of compliance with Sikh Reht Maryada.

I felt that there are some fundamental tenets that unite us as a Sikh community and that instead of dividing on differences we need to be one in common.

APPROACH: I have taken Sikh Reht Maryada’s Definition of a Sikh and tried to condense it in the above. Once one believes in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, the areas of “one creator” are covered. Once you believe in Amrit Pahul of Guru Gobind Singh ji the belief in other religions goes by the wayside.

Sikhism Pledge
(draft)

I believe in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, the teachings of ten Gurus and the amrit of Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji. Without regard to completeness of my Sikh persona, I will without any fear for loss of life, limb or liberty, defend my rights and of all other Sikh brothers and sisters, whether more or less complete Sikhs than me.
ਸਿੱਖੀ ਦੀ ਕਸਮ
(KrVw)
ਮੈਂ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗ੍ਰੰਥ ਸਾਹਿਬ, ਦਸ ਗੁਰੂਆਂ ਦੀ ਸਿੱਖਿਆ ਅਤੇ ਸ੍ਰੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੇਬਿੰਦ ਸਿੰਘ ਜੀ ਦੇ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਤਿ ਵਿੱਚ ਵਿਸ਼ਵਾਸ ਰੱਖਦਾ ਹਾਂ || ਮੇਰੀ ਸਿੱਖੀ ਸ਼ਖਸੀਅਤ ਵਿੱਚ ਕਮੀਆਂ ਹੋਨ ਦੇ ਬਾਵਯੂਦ, ਮੈਂ ਜਿੰਦਗੀ, ਅੰਗ ਜਾਂ ਅਜਾਦੀ ਦੀ ਪ੍ਰਵਾਹ ਕੀਤੇ ਬਿਣਾ ਆਪਨੇ ਅਤੇ ਹੇਰ ਸਾਰੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਭਰਾਵਾਂ ਅਤੇ ਭੈਨਾਂ ਦੇ ਅਧਿਕਾਰਾਂ ਦੀ ਰਖਵਾਲੀ ਕਰਾਂਗਾ, ਭਾਵੇਂ ਉਹ ਮੇਰੇ ਤੋਂ ਜਿਆਦਾ ਜਾਂ ਘੱਟ ਪੂਰੇ ਸਿੱਖ ਹੋਣ||
I am posting a poll too to check the pulse of our thoughts and possible direction.

Question for Poll: What are your thoughts on Sikhism Pledge?


  1. I believe it is worthwhile to have one and I like it as worded.
  2. I believe it is worthwhile to have one, but we need to revise wording and I have posted suggestions.
  3. I do not believe we should have one, the status-quo is fine.
  4. Other and I have posted my comments or suggestions.
I would like your thoughts, comments and suggestions.

Sat Sri Akal.

PS: Excerpt from Sikh Rehat Maryada (SRM)

Definition of Sikh

One Immortal Being
Ten Gurus, from Guru Nanak Dev to Guru Gobind Singh
The Guru Granth Sahib
The utterances and teachings of the ten Gurus
The baptism bequeathed by the tenth Guru, and who does not owe allegiance to any other religion, is a Sikh.
<!--[if gte mso 9]><xml> <w:LatentStyles DefLockedState="false" LatentStyleCount="156"> </w:LatentStyles> </xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style> /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-ansi-language:#0400; mso-fareast-language:#0400; mso-bidi-language:#0400;} </style> <![endif]-->
 
Last edited:

Ambarsaria

ੴ / Ik▫oaʼnkār
Writer
SPNer
Dec 21, 2010
3,380
5,687
Bhagat Singh ji thanks for your post.
It would be great if you explained the purpose of taking this pledge.
I thought the "Why" in the post served that purpose.

Essentially I want Sikhs to recognize a fraternity which is much deeper through various levels of Guru ji's wisdom that we all have. I have in my life seen much antagonism between the various factions within Sikhism. My desire and a wish is that when push comes to shove, we Sikhs are all of our Guru jis to a degree small or large. I want us all to recognize this as a core that sustains Sikh body and community and be cognizance of the same. My dream and wish being that some smart people could take it on for more flourishing of Sikhism and be proud to be part of the most wondrous legacy of our Gur ji past and SGGS at present.

This is Sikhi centric to recognize our roots, knowing key litmus test and fraternity. I did not want to mush it up by trying to boil the ocean and make it inter-religious endeavor for all of humanity. Even though it is not contra any other community and well within internationally recognized rights enshrined for exercising the freedom of religion around the world bar some autocratic countries.

So it is a desire that I felt and hence the suggestion starting this thread.

Sat Sri Akal.
 

Harry Haller

Panga Master
SPNer
Jan 31, 2011
5,769
8,185
51
Ambarsariaji

surely the pledge should be

Sikhism Pledge
(draft)

I believe in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, the teachings of ten Gurus and the amrit of Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji. Without regard to completeness of my Sikh persona, I will without any fear for loss of life, limb or liberty, defend my rights and of all other brothers and sisters regardless of religion and belief. By the grace of Creator give me the strength and determination to uphold my beliefs, and to serve Creation.

my opnion only
 

Ishna

Enthusiast
Writer
SPNer
May 9, 2006
3,249
5,184
Ambarsaria ji

I like where you're going from this. From the place I'm at now I can't give you any feedback but will be watching this space with much interest. :interestedkudi:
 
Aug 29, 2010
1,514
1,116
69
The draft presented by Harry Hallar ji is wonderfully worded one.
I have few points for considerations.

..What GuRu Gobind Singh ji did to Create Khalsaa is to be known as "KHANDE Ki PAHUL"
If we refer this as Amrit then this AMRIT is not for believing,By saying so one is definitely avoiding the acceptance of this Amrit which is Mandatory for Khalsaa.

It is very surprising to note that we all like to be known as Sikhs without being Khalsaa.
So there is need for introsepection what should be the real draft for such Sikhs.

My personal opinion is that SIKH can not be defined the way it has been done.
Certainly Khalsaa can be defined the way draft is presented.

Prakash.S.Bagga
 

Ishna

Enthusiast
Writer
SPNer
May 9, 2006
3,249
5,184
Prakash veer ji beat me to it, essentially.

What does "I believe in ... and the amrit of Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji" actually imply? What does it mean? How can you 'believe' in an initiation ceremony?

I think this part needs to be more clearly defined to eliminate confusion about Sikh/Khalsa. In my humble opinion.
 
Aug 29, 2010
1,514
1,116
69
Prakash veer ji beat me to it, essentially.

What does "I believe in ... and the amrit of Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji" actually imply? What does it mean? How can you 'believe' in an initiation ceremony?

I think this part needs to be more clearly defined to eliminate confusion about Sikh/Khalsa. In my humble opinion.
I have clarified a point in my post that what is given to a Sikh to become Khalsaa is "KHANDE KI PAHUL".......This is being promoted as Amrit.(I cant explain this why?)

The meaning of PAHUL is very important to understand.The Word PAHUL means an AGENT which increases ones POTENTIAL of POWER to unlimited extent.That is why this needs to be consumed physically so that one acquires unlimited power to fight in the war field.
This is very amazing effect of "KHANDE KI PAHUL" which makes Khalsa
always victorious in all odd situations.
You can verify a fact from the history that all the wars GuRu Gobind Singh ji won even being small in numbers against large numbers in opposite
forces.
So my understanding is that every Khalsaa is a SIKH but every Sikh is not necesarily be Khalsaa. But it can be observed that there is IMPOSITION of Khalsaa on Sikhs .This aspect is very difficult to accept for certain
obvious reasons you should analyse yourself

Now I think you can appreciate what is I believe or accept to be Khalsaa

Prakash.S.Bagga
 
Nov 14, 2008
283
417
Prakash veer ji beat me to it, essentially.

What does "I believe in ... and the amrit of Sri Guru Gobind Singh ji" actually imply? What does it mean? How can you 'believe' in an initiation ceremony?

I think this part needs to be more clearly defined to eliminate confusion about Sikh/Khalsa. In my humble opinion.

Sat Sri Akaal Ishna ji ,

I feel " believe in" here means

1) Sikhs who are Khalsa/Amritdhari .
2) Sikhs who aspires to join Khalsa ,but do not consider themselves fit yet .


just my views ....
 

BhagatSingh

SPNer
Apr 25, 2006
2,921
1,647
Ishna ji,
I think it means that you believe the initiation is an integral part of Sikhism, and you have it set as a goal for yourself to achieve.

Lol I am going to ask you again, what's up with your adherent? Before you had "existential... something there, now "borderline atheism". Anways, I pray that everything is alright.

Ambarsaria ji,
Ok I see the motivation. I think that's admirable but a few things must be understood first. I had some time on my hands so I gave this a lot of serious thought and here's what I have to say.
1. The way two neighbouring factions make peace is to celebrate both their unity AND difference. And not just in the political sphere but the individuals start to do this in their mind. They stop looking for homogeneity, that is, they stop wanting the others to believe in the same things they do. Have you done this in your mind? Have you celebrated the fact that (for instance) Namdharis, and some minor groups have living gurus?

Unless you the leader of this pledge have celebrated both the similarity and difference, there is no chance of this becoming a reality. It must stem from truth.



Now having discussed the mindset, let's go into the pledge itself:
2. Now to include all the factions into your pledge you might need to expand it. Bear in mind this is not a suggestion.
I believe in some portion of the bani of at least 1 of the authors of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.
I have taken out the limit to 10 gurus, this brings in the above mentioned group you left out. It brings in those groups that were alienated, Namdharis and the minor: Nanak Panthis, Kabir panthis, Ravidasia.

Now the authors of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji are all very much in agreement. If one has taken Kabir to be their guru, many other gurus and bhagats will match, it's just that that person has devoted their being to only one. Does that make sense?
So yes if they read the others, they would say "Yes I agree with this" so they technically believe in more than 1 but they haven't studied, or learned about them for whatever reason.

Now I also removed the belief in Amrit initiation because many groups just don't believe in that. I am not 100% sure but Namdharis, some Udasi and sevapanthi groups don't. Kabir Panthi, some Nanak Panthi and Ravidasia don't.

I also removed any pledge to defend another Sikh, leaving fighting for those who are able. Those disabled are included in the pedge this way. This is something groups tend to do anyway. You see one of your own getting hurt, the factor in taking action is if you are brave and are able to defend them, not whether you took a pledge. By fighting I mean all forms, not just hand to hand, gun to gun, but also in the political, economic field ie. discrimination, racism, political struggle.


Also we don't want to encourage intellectuals from siding with each other
only because they are Sikhs. This is dangerous to scholarly research.

I wouldn't even add anything about a God so those who are undisclosed, borderline atheist and exploring Sikhi are included. They are still connected to Sikhi by a thread however thin. Let's keep this intact so they can move in and out freely. If they leave with a sense of rejection, they may not come back. For example, due to the fact, the bani is theistic in nature, that attributes both impersonal and personal characteristics to God, those people who cherry-pick can do so. Cherrypicking can be healthy if you cherrypick good berries.

And we want everyone to be open-minded and be able to celebrate differences along with celebrating the unity I outlined above. So if I may add something:
I believe in acceptance of other men, women and their and my own life situation, as it is without tempering with it mentally. I will have only have love for them in my heart. If I fail at this I will not give up and continue to cultivate love until my pledge becomes a reality.


And third, we don't want random beliefs creeping into Sikhism, as if they were Sikhism. But on the other hand we want to stay open I would add:
I will honestly be an open space for opposing viewpoints until I find sufficient evidence and testimony from my own personal experience to give more credence to a belief.
A hidden # 4 is I will not dismiss beliefs without good reason.


3. Now I said that is not a suggestion because this isn't a pledge to being a Sikh anymore. It is now something else, a completely different way to approach things. This person does not belong to any faction and simultaneously is open to all of them. The word faction does not exist in his/her mind. Neither does the word God, through love he knows God, he does not need to label it as such. He may choose to live as an atheist or believe in any number or type of God(s). Because he loves everything, he is not attached to anything. He is not looking for particular experiences, he loves or pledges to love this situation whether it is pleasant or not. He is a scientific, rational individual but is open to testimony of personal experience and is open to non-rational and non-scientific (not the same as irrational) beliefs that may guide him better. He is open to other types of mind structures such as those rooted in magic, myth, rational or other.

One might say, you are wrong, there is nothing new here, this is a pledge for Sikhism. "The word faction does not exist in his/her mind" no koi hindu no koi musalman. "Through love he knows God" jin prem kio tin he prabh payo. The third one is the different mind structures found in Guru Granth Sahib. To them I would say read the second sentence of this paragraph closely. My attempt to tackle the pledge and bring it in consonance with OP's stated motivation and inspiration for writing the pledge, has lead me to expand it to something else entirely. It also has a personal bias. Being of a closed-minded and exclusive nature I tend to value open-mindedness and inclusiveness. Being a bit anxious and even a bit paranoid at times, I tend to value love of all people, and situations. And having studied all sorts of belief systems, I value even one individual who has devoted his life going deeper and deeper into just 1 thing, 1 individual whom they found more fascinating than anything else. If you can take out that bias and somehow put Sikhism back in, whilst retaining inclusiveness and openness, at the same times then I think you will end up with a really awesome pledge! Something one could cherish for many years.

Satsriakal
 
Last edited:
Aug 29, 2010
1,514
1,116
69
Sat Sri Akaal Ishna ji ,

I feel " believe in" here means

1) Sikhs who are Khalsa/Amritdhari .
2) Sikhs who aspires to join Khalsa ,but do not consider themselves fit yet .


just my views ....
For Khalsa/Amritdhari where is the need to believe in for them?

I think that the draft in who is Sikh should state clearly that any person preparing himself to become Khalsa/Amritdhari instead believe in. This is only a personal suggestion.

Prakash.S.Bagga
.
 

Luckysingh

Writer
SPNer
Dec 4, 2011
1,633
2,757
Vancouver
Ambarsaria ji,
Ok I see the motivation. I think that's admirable but a few things must be understood first. I had some time on my hands so I gave this a lot of serious thought and here's what I have to say.
1. The way two neighbouring factions make peace is to celebrate both their unity AND difference. And not just in the political sphere but the individuals start to do this in their mind. They stop looking for homogeneity, that is, they stop wanting the others to believe in the same things they do. Have you done this in your mind? Have you celebrated the fact that (for instance) Namdharis, and some minor groups have living gurus?

Unless you the leader of this pledge have celebrated both the similarity and difference, there is no chance of this becoming a reality. It must stem from truth.


Now having discussed the mindset, let's go into the pledge itself:
2. Now to include all the factions into your pledge you might need to expand it. Bear in mind this is not a suggestion.
I believe in some portion of the bani of at least 1 of the authors of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.
I have taken out the limit to 10 gurus, this brings in the above mentioned group you left out. It brings in those groups that were alienated, Namdharis and the minor: Nanak Panthis, Kabir panthis, Ravidasia.

Now the authors of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji are all very much in agreement. If one has taken Kabir to be their guru, many other gurus and bhagats will match, it's just that that person has devoted their being to only one. Does that make sense?
So yes if they read the others, they would say "Yes I agree with this" so they technically believe in more than 1 but they haven't studied, or learned about them for whatever reason.

Now I also removed the belief in Amrit initiation because many groups just don't believe in that. I am not 100% sure but Namdharis, some Udasi and sevapanthi groups don't. Kabir Panthi, some Nanak Panthi and Ravidasia don't.

I also removed any pledge to defend another Sikh, leaving fighting for those who are able. Those disabled are included in the pedge this way. This is something groups tend to do anyway. You see one of your own getting hurt, the factor in taking action is if you are brave and are able to defend them, not whether you took a pledge. By fighting I mean all forms, not just hand to hand, gun to gun, but also in the political, economic field ie. discrimination, racism, political struggle.


Also we don't want to encourage intellectuals from siding with each other only because they are Sikhs. This is dangerous to scholarly research.


I believe in acceptance of other men, women and their and my own life situation, as it is without tempering with it mentally. I will have only have love for them in my heart. If I fail at this I will not give up and continue to cultivate love until my pledge becomes a reality.


And third, we don't want random beliefs creeping into Sikhism, as if they were Sikhism. But on the other hand we want to stay open I would add:
I will honestly be an open space for opposing viewpoints until I find sufficient evidence and testimony from my own personal experience to give more credence to a belief.
A hidden # 4 is I will not dismiss beliefs without good reason.


3. Now I said that is not a suggestion because this isn't a pledge to being a Sikh anymore. It is now something else, a completely different way to approach things. This person does not belong to any faction and simultaneously is open to all of them. The word faction does not exist in his/her mind. Neither does the word God, through love he knows God, he does not need to label it as such. He may choose to live as an atheist or believe in any number or type of God(s). Because he loves everything, he is not attached to anything. He is not looking for particular experiences, he loves or pledges to love this situation whether it is pleasant or not. He is a scientific, rational individual but is open to testimony of personal experience and is open to non-rational and non-scientific (not the same as irrational) beliefs that may guide him better. He is open to other types of mind structures such as those rooted in magic, myth, rational or other.

One might say, you are wrong, there is nothing new here, this is a pledge for Sikhism. "The word faction does not exist in his/her mind" no koi hindu no koi musalman. "Through love he knows God" jin prem kio tin he prabh payo. The third one is the different mind structures found in Guru Granth Sahib. To them I would say read the second sentence of this paragraph closely. My attempt to tackle the pledge and bring it in consonance with OP's stated motivation and inspiration for writing the pledge, has lead me to expand it to something else entirely. It also has a personal bias. Being of a closed-minded and exclusive nature I tend to value open-mindedness and inclusiveness. Being a bit anxious and even a bit paranoid at times, I tend to value love of all people, and situations. And having studied all sorts of belief systems, I value even one individual who has devoted his life going deeper and deeper into just 1 thing, 1 individual whom they found more fascinating than anything else. If you can take out that bias and somehow put Sikhism back in, whilst retaining inclusiveness and openness, at the same times then I think you will end up with a really awesome pledge! Something one could cherish for many years.

Satsriakal
Some very good points here.
In all fairness a pledge comes across as a pretty good idea in a nearly ideal world.
The reality is that we are not anywhere near this ideal and to accept all the factions on equal par is not that easy.
As you mention, most of these like ravidasiss and naamdharis have gone seperate ways because of being sidelined by so called mainstream sikhs.

Then we have these issues whereby some of these believe in living gurus.
These kind of samparnas and jathas are the very ones that the mainstream sikhs blame for damaging sikhism, how could we truly pledge or oath that we would react with them on equal terms ?

The only group or faction that is still scattered is the monai or that see themselves as sehajdhari. If the hard core amrithdharis of which there are very many for example the ones that don't accept monai or sehajdhari doing kirtan, doing seva, involved in Gurdwara committee and co-ordination etc... . If these same amritdharies pursue tighter controls as to exclude the sehajdharies from any important positions in sikh infastructure, then it won't be long before sehajdhaires and monai seperate and form their own groups and gurdwaras whereby they do all the co-ordinating and maintenance of themselves.

The way things are going, it seems we are closer to more branches like this occuring of exclusion rather than accepting all groups and factions and giving them inclusion.

This is how I feel as a sehajdhari, and it seems to come across this way in all directions.
 

Ambarsaria

ੴ / Ik▫oaʼnkār
Writer
SPNer
Dec 21, 2010
3,380
5,687
Prakash.S.Bagga ji thanks for your post. I want you to expand on the following in your post.
My personal opinion is that SIKH can not be defined the way it has been done.
Please define Sikh then for me they way you would like to see it. I thought the way I worded it was that it was a Sikh recognizing Khalsa but not being necessarily Khalsa at any point in their life. Specifically to include sehajdhari as a place where more future Khalsa could come from too.

I thank you for "KHANDE Ki PAHUL"
comment as I wanted to put it in the definition/pledge but could not find quick reference. I believe that this is an ultimate litmus test. If one does not respect the concept of Khalsa then it is pretty hard to come together in a definition of convergence that includes say sehajdhari and "Tiar-bur_Tiar" Khalsa Sikhs. Everything else can be worked upon or with goodwill made to converge while respecting each other.

Sat Sri Akal.
 

Ishna

Enthusiast
Writer
SPNer
May 9, 2006
3,249
5,184
The way things are going, it seems we are closer to more branches like this occuring of exclusion rather than accepting all groups and factions and giving them inclusion.
Lucky veerji

How can someone accept all groups or paths as equal while adhearing to one's own path and standing up to any challenges along the way? If all groups are equal and accepted then we might as well all just take the easy road.

There is no escaping this problem when dealing with something as subjective as religion.

At least, there must be a definition of Sikh/ism or else it is nothing. One must draw the line somewhere.

Bhagatji, the offending tag has been removed.
 

BhagatSingh

SPNer
Apr 25, 2006
2,921
1,647
Bhagatji, the offending tag has been removed.
Haha
I was not offended at all but was glad to see you developing, maturing and getting frustrated with things e.g. existential stuff, belief in God, which is all part of learning.

I wanted you to share your experiences with me "What's up?" means what's going on?. But you don't have to and you shouldn't feel the need to remove a tag. In fact, you should put a tag that says "I am an atheist and I don't give rat's bottom about who is offended. This is where I am right now, everything I have done, been exposed to and my being have lead me here. It may change, it may not change but I do know that whatever becomes of me and whatever I come across in life, I am capable of tackling it full force". :grinningsingh: Ok that maybe too long, and probably won't fit there but it's the attitude the counts right?
 

Ambarsaria

ੴ / Ik▫oaʼnkār
Writer
SPNer
Dec 21, 2010
3,380
5,687
Ishna ji I would love to get some of your ideas. You can private message if you so chose.
There is no escaping this problem when dealing with something as subjective as religion.

At least, there must be a definition of Sikh/ism or else it is nothing. One must draw the line somewhere.
My intention in this pursuit is to stabilize the shrinking circle due to exclusion and abate the same. Fortunately it could also be a springboard for expanding the circle of inclusion. There is no point in addressing in this pledge those who in their heart of hearts do not believe/respect Khalsa of Guru Gobind Singh ji at all.

I do not like to boil the ocean but have baby steps. There has to be specificity as otherwise there will be no impact on the issue that the pledge is trying to impact.


Sat Sri Akal.

PS: I am drafting a response to Harry ji and other posts but want to take the time to review the suggestions and implications in greater detail.

I want to see the Sikhs to recognize what the rest of the world considers as Sikhs beyond turban and hair physicals. For example even though there are copycat "Kara" wearers it still sets a flag for me when I see one wearing a Kara. This raises a specter of some special commonality which should not pull people apart rather should get recognized to bring people together.
 
Last edited:
Aug 29, 2010
1,514
1,116
69
Prakash.S.Bagga ji thanks for your post. I want you to expand on the following in your post.Please define Sikh then for me they way you would like to see it. I thought the way I worded it was that it was a Sikh recognizing Khalsa but not being necessarily Khalsa at any point in their life. Specifically to include sehajdhari as a place where more future Khalsa could come from too.

I thank you for "KHANDE Ki PAHUL" comment as I wanted to put it in the definition/pledge but could not find quick reference. I believe that this is an ultimate litmus test. If one does not respect the concept of Khalsa then it is pretty hard to come together in a definition of convergence that includes say sehajdhari and "Tiar-bur_Tiar" Khalsa Sikhs. Everything else can be worked upon or with goodwill made to converge while respecting each other.

DEAR AMBARSARIA Ji
I do agree with your feelings about some common definition of SIKH but is it possible to converge two parallel lines.?
I think there should be a clarity who is a Sikh and Who is a Khalsa.

As per my understanding.
Who can be a Sikh is well defined in SGGS ji.Why dont we look into that as definition for the Sikh. This deifinition covers any one to be a Sikh
Khalsa is certainly a Sikh who has taken "KHANDE KI PAHUL" as Amrit and follows the teacings of SGGS.

It is very unpleasant situation that there is no concept as Sahajdhari Sikh in the current existing Khalsa Poilitics.Do you think that the so called Sahajdhari sikhs can ever be accepted by Khalsa to be a part at par.
Never
Now it is politics which is domonating the society where the broadness of religion outlook is mitigated of its own.

So i think it would be better if one considers Sikhs and Khalsa as distinct
entities.I fully understand this is not going to be liked .But one can not change the fact.

I stand apologetic for anything wrong in the message felt otherwise.

Prakash.S.Bagga
 

Ambarsaria

ੴ / Ik▫oaʼnkār
Writer
SPNer
Dec 21, 2010
3,380
5,687
Prakash.S.Bagga ji thanks for your post.
I think there should be a clarity who is a Sikh and Who is a Khalsa.

As per my understanding.
Who can be a Sikh is well defined in Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.Why dont we look into that as definition for the Sikh. This deifinition covers any one to be a Sikh
Khalsa is certainly a Sikh who has taken "KHANDE KI PAHUL" as Amrit and follows the teacings of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.
Prakash.S.Bagga ji I think you have answered your own question without perhaps realizing so.

Khalsa

  • Follows the teachings of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.
  • Believes in "KHANDE KI PAHUL"
  • Has taken "KHANDE KI PAHUL" as Amrit and so practices.
Sikh

  • Follows the teachings of Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji.
  • Believes in "KHANDE KI PAHUL"
    • Has not taken "KHANDE KI PAHUL" as Amrit or having taken does not practice.
It is very unpleasant situation that there is no concept as Sahajdhari Sikh in the current existing Khalsa Poilitics.Do you think that the so called Sahajdhari sikhs can ever be accepted by Khalsa to be a part at par. Never
The pledge that I am suggesting does not equate. It simply recognizes the commonness of beliefs which is the same between a Sikh and Khalsa. However Khalsa is blessed to be in full practice of the beliefs.

Any comments appreciated.

Sat Sri Akal.

PS: Prakash.S.Bagga ji why you call it "KHANDE KI PAHUL" and not "KHANDE DEE PAHUL".
 
Aug 29, 2010
1,514
1,116
69
PS: Prakash.S.Bagga ji why you call it "KHANDE KI PAHUL" and not "KHANDE DEE PAHUL".

AMBARSARIA Ji
Well I stand corrected for this 'Actually it is "KHADE DEE PAHUL"
Moreover I feel the word "Belief" shuld not be applicable to Khalsa.
Taking "KHANDE DEE PAHUL" As Amrit is basically an open invitation for anyone
to become Khalsa.
These are some personal views only.
Your attempt is really appreciable if it gets overall acceptance from Sangat .

Prakash.S.Bagga
 

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.

Shabad Vichaar by SPN'ers

In an attempt to bring more Gurbani into our lives it would be great to analyse one shabad every week. It will be wonderful to get your thoughts about what the shabad is telling us and how we can...

SPN on Facebook

...
Top