Is Sikhism Succumbing To Fundamentalism?

[Tejwant Singh]

Personally, I think the more appropriate name used should be Pragmatic Sikh rather than Fundamentalist Sikh.

Tejwant Singh

 

[BaljeetSingh]

That's exactly my point....people call practicing Sikhs as Fundamentalist without knowing the meaning of the word "Fundamentalist".

And instead of asking who are these practicing Khalsa Sikhs, I would ask Who are these deras and their followers what are their true motives....They clearly are not Sikhs.

 

[spnadmin]

Baljeet ji

Thanks -- good because I do not want to be at odds with you. My earlier comments about fragmentation however still apply. There is more than one rehitnama and more than one group who follows a specific rehit considers himself/herself to be khalsa.

This article would illustrate my point -- because it looks at differences within the panth without the context of deras or babas. But then again, maybe not!

Vedanti for one rehat maryada for all takhts - Chandigarh - Cities - The Times of India

 

[BaljeetSingh]

Oh...and by the way, talking about deficiencies and improving....I am not sure if I am open to discuss the deficiencies of Sikhism at all. For me, the Guru's word is the utmost and clearly guides me spiritually and the Rehatnaama tells me how to live life socially.....I am not ready to listen any mortal to tell me there are deficiencies in SGGS or Rehatnaama. It will make me no different than the Dera followers

 

[spnadmin]

Oh...and by the way, talking about deficiencies and improving....I am not sure if I am open to discuss the deficiencies of Sikhism at all. For me, the Guru's word is the utmost and clearly guides me spiritually and the Rehatnaama tells me how to live life socially.....I am not ready to listen any mortal to tell me there are deficiencies in SGGS or Rehatnaama. It will make me no different than the Dera followers

Baljeet ji

You were referring to my deficiencies. Or so it seemed. :}8-:

 

[BaljeetSingh]

Hmmm...more than one rehat....I am not sure if I came across more than one rehat....and I am not ready to promote others even by reading about them.

 

[BaljeetSingh]

You were referring to my deficiencies. Or so it seemed.

No, not at all....I apologize if I meant that in any way.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Baljeet Singh ji,

Guru Fateh.

I apologise for piggyback riding on the interaction between yourself and Antonia but I could not resist to offer my 2 cent worth. So, please bear with me.

You write:

Well, in my humble opinion, SGPC is a management committee to run gurudwaras and not to define Sikhi. What they are doing is unfortunate and should be stopped.

I totally agree with you and it is connected by the political umbilical cord with Badal which makes it even worse.

Since SGPC is an elected body, people like you should go and participate in the election process and stop all this non sense....which bye the way, is another important topic which should be discussed in another thread separately.

How about people like you? Why do you refuse to join the same as you have asked Antonia ji to do?

I do not want to deviate from the original topic of branding practicing Khalsa Sikhs as fundamentalists.

I hope you are aware that after 9-11, the defintion of Fundamentalist and its perception have been changed towards the derrogatory side. You may also be aware that a fundamentalist right wing White person shot a guard at the Holocaust Center in Washington D.C. a couple of days ago. Lots of fundamentalist Christians, Muslims and Hindus have destructive agendas. Al- Queda, Talibans and Right Wing Nazi Christians and the Hindus that created the carnage of 1984 are a few examples.

As the definition has been changed then a Sikh should be openminded NOT to create the same impression and perception as those hate groups mentioned above. That is what SGGS teaches us, to be openminded.

So, your insistance of using the word fundamentalist in its literal sense for a Sikh makes no sense in today's day and age in my opinion.

They are just following the spritual guidance from SGGS and keeping the social aspect by following rehatnaama. Anyone else is just trying to redefine sikhi to his/her advantage or easiness. Trust me, it is not easy to be a Sikh. It is one of the most difficult religions to practice (when followed strictly).

Who are THEY ? You mean you are not part of us Sikhs? No one is redefining Sikhi. I have no idea where you got that from. Please elaborate a little bit on that. Just stating something without giving references makes little sense. It is very EASY to be a SIKH. I am sorry to know that you find it tough and difficult to be a Sikh. Can you share with us why it is not easy for you to be a Sikh?

Thanks and looking forward to interacting with you in a constructive Sikhi manner.

Regards

Tejwant Singh

 

[spnadmin]

I do not want to deviate from the original topic of branding practicing Khalsa Sikhs as fundamentalists. They are just following the spritual guidance from SGGS and keeping the social aspect by following rehatnaama. Anyone else is just trying to redefine sikhi to his/her advantage or easiness. Trust me, it is not easy to be a Sikh. It is one of the most difficult religions to practice (when followed strictly).

Regards

Bajeet ji

Forgive me -- I have a tendency to be obsessional at times. I just compared the Damdami rehit and the rehi maryada in several places. There are major differences between the two. The sections on marriage for example deviate not just in content but also in terms of spiritual orientation. Both rehits could be considered a total blueprint for living a Sikh life, and a follower of one or the other to the letter might want to be considered a fundamentalist in the best sense of the word. But they would be following two very different blueprints.

 

[BaljeetSingh]

Dear Vaheguru Seekern Ji - Here are my responses:

How about people like you? Why do you refuse to join the same as you have asked Antonia ji to do?

Well, I am doing my bit by staying outside SGPC...and then there are geographical distances that prevent me from serving the community in India.

So, your insistance of using the word fundamentalist in its literal sense for a Sikh makes no sense in today's day and age in my opinion.

The term fundamentalist means the same as it meant when this term was coined perhaps hundreds of years ago. What I object to is to use this word to describe practicing Sikhs....as many news reports did. They reported the recent violence in Punjab as between fundamentalist Sikhs and Dalit Sikhs...I was just objecting to the term "Fundamentalist" to describe practicing Sikhs.

Who are THEY ? You mean you are not part of us Sikhs? No one is redefining Sikhi. I have no idea where you got that from. Please elaborate a little bit on that. Just stating something without giving references makes little sense.

I referred Fundamentalist Sikhs as "They". Please read the entire para to resolve the context of "They"

It is very EASY to be a Sikh. I am sorry to know that you find it tough and difficult to be a Sikh. Can you share with us why it is not easy for you to be a Sikh?

Come on...I am a practicing (some people might call me Fundamentalist ) Sikh and I know it is not easy being one.....Especially, growing up as a Sikh boy in Hindu dominated area...Ohh...I was bullied and beaten by my hindu classmates....because I am a Sikh...I am not going into the details, but it is not easy....What I meant was that you have to be brave to be a true sikh. It is easy to shave off beard and cut the hair and roam around in the public, but to sport a turban and beard and walk around with your chin up....only braves can do it.

 

[BaljeetSingh]

Bajeet ji

Forgive me -- I have a tendency to be obsessional at times. I just compared the Damdami rehit and the rehi maryada in several places. There are major differences between the two. The sections on marriage for example deviate not just in content but also in terms of spiritual orientation. Both rehits could be considered a total blueprint for living a Sikh life, and a follower of one or the other to the letter might want to be considered a fundamentalist in the best sense of the word. But they would be following two very different blueprints.

Forgive my ignorance, but I have no idea about the other rehits....perhaps I never needed to look around for "other" rehits.

 

[spnadmin]

Forgive my ignorance, but I have no idea about the other rehits....perhaps I never needed to look around for "other" rehits.

Baljeet ji

I acknowledge your focus on one rehitnama. Others are focused on their rehitnamas. Damdami Takht has a rehitnama, and they stick to their guns. Is there a fool-proof way to find the one and only true rehit?

My question is serious and not intended to be a joke or a challenge. Charges and counter-charges of "fundamentalist" when intended in a negative way rise from the lack of calm and dispassionate discussions of why there are various rehits?

 

[Tejwant Singh]

Baljeet Singh ji,

Guru Fateh.

Thanks for your response.

You write:

Well, I am doing my bit by staying outside SGPC...and then there are geographical distances that prevent me from serving the community in India.

Well, if you are staying outside SGPC then why are you asking others to go and join the election? How do you know the same geographical distances do not prevent Antonia ji from serving the same community as you can not? It seems you are jumping to conclusion without having the facts in hand. As you know you can not participate in the SGPC elections, you also do not know if others can. So, it is better for a person especially for a Sikh to ask others if they can what you can not for the same reasons.

The term fundamentalist means the same as it meant when this term was coined perhaps hundreds of years ago. What I object to is to use this word to describe practicing Sikhs....as many news reports did. They reported the recent violence in Punjab as between fundamentalist Sikhs and Dalit Sikhs.
...I was just objecting to the term "Fundamentalist" to describe practicing Sikhs.

I think, either you did not read my response or you did not understand what I said. I have no idea why you are taking out the events of 9-11 out of the picture. I am sure you are aware that a Sikh was killed in Arizona because someone thought he was a fundamentalist Muslim.

And then you are contradicting yourself. In your initial post given below you liked the word Fundamentlist for a practicing Sikh and also explained it what it means and now you say you object to it. What is it? Would you have been happy if they had used the word practicing Sikhs instead? I really do not understand what you true objection is.

The word "fundamentalist" has been misused many times and so much that it has become synonymous with terrorism and atrocity. I, for one, object the use of the word "fundamentalist" in the way it is used now a days. I mean what is wrong in being a fundamentalist? The term "Khalsa" means pure and if one is trying to stay pure by being a fundamentalist - or sticking to one's principles, what is wrong with that? All great philosophers and scientists have been fundamentalists. Guru Arjan Dev was a fundamentalist - He stuck to his principles till his last breath. Guru Teg Bahadur was a fundamentalist - He never gave up his prinicples. Albert Einstein and Newton were fundamentalists as well.

I referred Fundamentalist Sikhs as "They". Please read the entire para to resolve the context of "They"

So you meant "I or We" as you were talking about yourself as well ?

Come on...I am a practicing (some people might call me Fundamentalist ) Sikh and I know it is not easy being one.....Especially, growing up as a Sikh boy in Hindu dominated area...Ohh...I was bullied and beaten by my hindu classmates....because I am a Sikh...I am not going into the details, but it is not easy....What I meant was that you have to be brave to be a true sikh. It is easy to shave off beard and cut the hair and roam around in the public, but to sport a turban and beard and walk around with your chin up....only braves can do it.

So, you mean it is your personal opinion. For you it is difficult to be a Sikh.I have no idea why you made this a blanket statment which inculded all Sikhs in general because in my personal experience and in my family's it is not difficult. My son Trimaan who is 13 has been the only Sikh with a Patka in our town since his kindergarten and next fall he is going to High school where there is no other Sikh either. And also he is going to participate in the National debate competition in San Antonio, Tx at the end of this month after having won the state competition.

Let me borrow my favourite slogan from Mai ji, our Mentor in this forum:

WHY TRY TO FIT IN?

YOU WERE BORN TO STAND OUT!

Tejwant Singh

 

[Ajmer singh Randhawa]

Veer jio Guru fateh !!
I don't agree with what you have written. This is the agony and the pain you have successfully shaped in words because your hairs were cut when you were only 14 but don't regret. Even than you connect your lost threads of Sikhism in you.You write that(a)whether any commentary is taken as criticism- Criticism in ignorance provokes the readers and results in unnecessary arguments (b)- Of course commenting about religion is a dangerous business without theological authority but you have the authority to suggest and to do the needful,(c)&(d)- It is difficult for you what Sikhism stands for. It is just because your roots are not connected to Sikh culture, you are totally unaware. There are many books available to know about Sikhism and its explanations on Rahat Maryada(Disciplined life).
I also totally disagree with you that the caste system creates any tension. I am going to be sixty very soon but throughout my life i have never seen any such tension. There are the societies of certain castes responsible for giving the names to their Gurudwaras and it is not very much liked in India. Indian Sikhs visit any Gurudwara without bothering which society is maintaining and controlling. Only thing in the mind of a Sikh is always that,:Jithe jaye bahe mera satguru So thaan suhaava ram raje !!So where the Guru Sahab ji is, that place is to be worshipped by a Sikh(a true follower).
The violence which sparked in Austria is not the result of community clashes but of disrespect given to Guru Granth Sahab ji by Sant Ramanand who was not a Sikh (His name clearly indicates-not singh but das), His entry was banned in Bermingham. See the press report:--
> Tensions had been building up within the Ravidass community for a
> number of years, concerning the Sach Khand Dera (Monestary) and there
> anti Guru Granth Sahib practices. A few years ago, Sant Rama Nand,
> leader of the Sach Khand Monestary came to the Guru Ravidass Gurdwara
> on Union Road in Handsworth, Birmingham, UK. He was forced to leave by
> the majority of the congregation and management committee because the
> majority of the Ravidass community took objection to the presence of
> any Dera leader, sitting parallel to the Guru Granth Sahib, the
> present and perpetual Sikh Guru.
>
> After this incident the Guru Ravidass Gurdwara in Handsworth mounted a
> plaque within the Gurdwara, banning any cult leaders from undermining
> the Guru Granth Sahib, with there ritual worshipping practices.
>
> At this time Sant Rama Nand leader of the Sach Khand Monestary hired
> the hall at the Holyhead High School on Holyhead Road, Handsworth to
> hold a gathering for his followers because the Guru Ravidass Gurdwara
> congregation and management committee, would not allow the gathering
> to take place there.
Now all the doubts are cleared that Sant Ramanand was practising anti panthac activities and provoking his followers to disrespect Guru Granth Sahab ji.
Use of booze is cindemned in Guru Granth Sahab ji, it is the ignorance of the Sikhs that they are unaware of it.See:--"Amrit ka waapari hovey kiaa mad choochey bhao tarey !! " (Ang 360), and Kabirji says,"Kabir bhaang maachli sura paan jo jo prani khahen !! Tirath barat nem tin ke kiye Sabey rasaatal jaahen !! '' (Salok Kabir 232). There are one or two instances are more to be quoted.But it is very high in use among Sikhs, reason -ignorance already stated.Marrying in other castes but within Sikhs is getting common now a days. People are generally coming out of this phenomena of marrying within community.
You should also be aware that the Sikh soldiers had written freely to their officers during world wars that if they die of a bullet injury in head , there may not be any claim given to their families but they shall not wear helmets. Now bullet proof head gear are being introduces, they are made of fine fabric like clothings and easily can be used. Wait some time it will not be alike helmets.
The people who argue that the long hairs are not actually part of Sikhism. They may be from other religions but can't be Sikhs. Five Kakaars are essentially to dress a Sikh. It is the uniform of a Sikh soldier. Without these signs he can't be called a Sikh.
In the last i would like to say that as you fear under pain of death to the preachers of the religion because certain people determind to tell others what to believe and how to believe is not for all but it is necessity of the time as Sikh youths are attracted to wear caps and cut their hairs and trim beards need a stick to prevent this malpractice. Guru Gobind Singh says, "Raaj bina nahin dharam chalai hai !! Dharam bina sab daley maley hai !!
Waheguru ji ka Khalsa Waheguru Ji ki Fateh !!
Ajmer Singh Randhawa.


[/FONT]

 

[dalbirk]

Thing is Dalbir, what happens with stories like this, is that the issue of casteism in Panjabis never gets addressed and is yet again buried in the sand.

We have an opportunity to differentiate ourselves, we should take it.

Dear Dal Singh Ji ,
I'm not denying that Castism does not exist in Sikhs in Punjab . Infact many times I've raised this issue , there r separate Abadis ( Vehras ) outside villages for these so-called low castes , separate Gurudwaras in many villages , even separate cremation grounds . This Jatt-Dalit divide is quite recent about 20-25 years old . But the other Jatt-Bhappa was there in 60s & 70s . It is just that I was trying to make some facts known which came to my notice regardaing these incidents .