Mona And Sehajdhari

[Archived_Member_19]

here you go Randip ji, KDS ji

<A Sikh follows rehat of Guru Sahib which is to take Amrit, get naam, do Amrit vela and stay away from bajjar kurehats. Rehat also includes keeping hair. Hence in Sikhi, keeping hair is not optional but a requirement. Those who don't follow rehat are not Sikhs.>

i rest my case.

 

[kds1980]

here you go Randip ji, KDS ji

<A Sikh follows rehat of Guru Sahib which is to take Amrit, get naam, do Amrit vela and stay away from bajjar kurehats. Rehat also includes keeping hair. Hence in Sikhi, keeping hair is not optional but a requirement. Those who don't follow rehat are not Sikhs.>

i rest my case.

read my first reply in this thread

 

[Archived_Member_19]

kds ji

i agree there are different view points

i only wanted to point out that the orthodox view point is much louder than others

 

[kds1980]

kds ji

i agree there are different view points

i only wanted to point out that the orthodox view point is much louder than others

this is true for all religions

 

[J.A.T.T]

A Sikh follows rehat of Guru Sahib which is to take Amrit, get naam, do Amrit vela and stay away from bajjar kurehats. Rehat also includes keeping hair. Hence in Sikhi, keeping hair is not optional but a requirement. Those who don't follow rehat are not Sikhs.

But there are so many different kind of rehats out there though. According to the AKJ Sikhs, kesh (hair) isn't one of the 5 K's. Also using your definition, I can say that people like Maharaja Ranjit Singh weren’t Sikhs at all.

 

[Bijla Singh]

Regardless of variations of Rehats all jathebandis agree that taking Amrit and getting Naam is a requirement. All jathebandis agree upon the most fundamentals of Sikhi such as keeping hair, five banis, Guru Granth Sahib the only Guru etc. AKJ believes in Keski as Kakkar but they still hold keeping hair a requirement. The definition I provided can be backed by rehatnamas, tankhanamas and Sikh history. If Maharaja Ranjit Singh did not keep rehat and follow the teachings of Guru Sahib then he was not a Sikh but it doesn't mean he was a bad person or anything. There are no exceptions for anyone when it comes to Sikhi.

 

[Lionchild]

lol...

Namdaris
Amritdaris
Sehajdhari
keshdari

Somehow it seems all of place and is does not sound right...

 

[Bijla Singh]

Can you provide any solid reference that namdharis are Sikhs of Guru Granth Sahib Ji (Jot of Guru Nanak Sahib)?

 

[J.A.T.T]

Regardless of variations of Rehats all jathebandis agree that taking Amrit and getting Naam is a requirement. All jathebandis agree upon the most fundamentals of Sikhi such as keeping hair, five banis, Guru Granth Sahib the only Guru etc. AKJ believes in Keski as Kakkar but they still hold keeping hair a requirement. The definition I provided can be backed by rehatnamas, tankhanamas and Sikh history. If Maharaja Ranjit Singh did not keep rehat and follow the teachings of Guru Sahib then he was not a Sikh but it doesn't mean he was a bad person or anything. There are no exceptions for anyone when it comes to Sikhi.

So I guess this means that there isn't any Sikhs in this world. The last time I checked the figures, there were about 23 million Sikhs in this world. I wonder how many of them are Amritdharis and do their prayers daily. Like it or not, mona/Sehajdhari and Keshdahris are Sikhs by default.

 

[Bijla Singh]

Define default? I would like to see the references from acceptable Sikh sources. Sikhi doesn't need quantity but quality. 23 million or any other figures include all those who claim themselves Sikhs. Many of them cut hair, drink, smoke and do bajjar kurehats. Stop giving me opinions. Present solid references. One who is not Amritdhari and doesn't keep rehat is not a Sikh. This is the hard fact which for you like any other mona is hard to swallow.

 

[Veeru]

This is the hard fact which for you like any other mona is hard to swallow.

What's really hard for people like you to swallow is that someone with behaviour like yours, leave alone being a Sikh, is not even a human...

Have a good day

 

[Bijla Singh]

Tough talk coming from someone who has no references to prove their point. I may not be a Sikh according to you but the fact is that monay people as well as everyone who is not Amritdhari are not Sikhs of Guru Sahib. By the way, how did you reach the conclusion that I am not a human? If other people state their opinions you are fine with it because you agree with them but if I state my opinions based on Sikhi you resort to personal insults. This shows how intolerant you really are.

 

[Veeru]

Tough talk coming from someone who has no references to prove their point. I may not be a Sikh according to you but the fact is that monay people as well as everyone who is not Amritdhari are not Sikhs of Guru Sahib. By the way, how did you reach the conclusion that I am not a human? If other people state their opinions you are fine with it because you agree with them but if I state my opinions based on Sikhi you resort to personal insults. This shows how intolerant you really are.

If you are not even sure yourself whether or not you are a Sikh, how on this earth do you think you have right to tell others that they are not Sikhs?

The least a good human should do in today's society is try not splitting humanity. The one who does anything to split humanity doesn't even qualify to be a human. Religion fanatics are the worst offenders of splitting humanity, thus are not qualified to be good humans.

 

[kds1980]

Sikhi doesn't need quantity but quality

bijla singh ji a religion need both quantity and quality to survive.quality cannot emerge without quantity.also without quantity political power is not possible.

 

[J.A.T.T]

How about you swallow this:

THE SIKH GURDWARAS ACT, 1925.

“Sikh “Sikh” means a person who professes the Sikh religion or, in the case of a deceased person, who professed the Sikh religion or was known to be a Sikh during his life time. If any question arises as to whether any living person is or is not a Sikh, he shall be deemed respectively to be or not to be a Sikh according as he makes or refuses to make in such manner as the [Provincial Government], may prescribe the following declaration:-
I solemnly affirm that I am a Sikh, that I believe in the Guru Granth Sahib, that I believe in the Ten Gurus and that I have no other religion.]”


THE SIKH GURDWARAS ACT, 1925



Sikh Rehat Maryada:

Chapter I
The Definition of Sikh
Ariticle 1

Any human being who faithfully believes in

(i) One Immortal Being,
(ii) Ten Gurus, from Guru Nanak Dev to Guru Gobind Singh,
(iii) The Guru Granth Sahib,
(iv) The utterances and teachings of the ten Gurus and
(v) the baptism bequeathed by the tenth Guru, and who does not owe allegiance to any other religion, is a Sikh.

Sikh Reht Maryada, The Definition of Sikh, Sikh Conduct & Conventions, Sikh Religion Living, India

 

[Bijla Singh]

If you are not even sure yourself whether or not you are a Sikh, how on this earth do you think you have right to tell others that they are not Sikhs?

I never said I wasn't a Sikh. Re-read my posts before writing a response. I stated that "According to you I may not be a Sikh" but the facts is that only Amritdhari rehatwaan person is a Sikh.

The least a good human should do in today's society is try not splitting humanity. The one who does anything to split humanity doesn't even qualify to be a human. Religion fanatics are the worst offenders of splitting humanity, thus are not qualified to be good humans.

How am I trying to split humanity? I provided the definition of a Sikh. I never said non-Sikhs weren't humans. If I say one who believes in Mohammad is a Muslim and not a Sikh, is that splitting humanity also? If you must know Guru sahib has even stated that name of a "Nigura" person is bad. "Niguray Ka Hai Nau Bura". One can only become a Guru Wala by taking Amrit. Those who turn their backs on Guru Sahib are the real traitors of the Panth.

Mr. "Jatt" first you ask "I am confused about these people" and then you come up with your own definitions. In any case, read the Maryada carefully. How can one claim to follow Guru Sahib and not take Amrit which is the teaching of Guru Sahib? Naam Japna is one of the basic principles of Sikhi and naam cannot be obtained without a Guru. Hence one must take Amrit.

 

[Veeru]

I never said I wasn't a Sikh. Re-read my posts before writing a response. I stated that "According to you I may not be a Sikh" but the facts is that only Amritdhari rehatwaan person is a Sikh.



How am I trying to split humanity? I provided the definition of a Sikh. I never said non-Sikhs weren't humans. If I say one who believes in Mohammad is a Muslim and not a Sikh, is that splitting humanity also? If you must know Guru sahib has even stated that name of a "Nigura" person is bad. "Niguray Ka Hai Nau Bura". One can only become a Guru Wala by taking Amrit. Those who turn their backs on Guru Sahib are the real traitors of the Panth.

Mr. "Jatt" first you ask "I am confused about these people" and then you come up with your own definitions. In any case, read the Maryada carefully. How can one claim to follow Guru Sahib and not take Amrit which is the teaching of Guru Sahib? Naam Japna is one of the basic principles of Sikhi and naam cannot be obtained without a Guru. Hence one must take Amrit.

Yeah sure an Amritdhari can be a terrorist and still be a Sikh, an Amrtidhari can be drug smuggler and still be a Sikh, sure an Amritdhari can be dirty politician and still be a Sikh. Sorry pal, Sikhi ain't that cheap.

As far as Rehat Maryada goes, you need to find the one guru(s) wrote. Don't give us the manmade Rehat Maryada. Show us the original Rehat Maryada written by any of the gurus. All so-called Rehat Maryadas today were written by people like you and me and have nothing to do with spirituality. In fact, there are alot of stuff in so-called Rehat Maryadas today that not only go against humanity and spirituality but also aren't logical at all, thus go against spirituality and Sikhi.

Yes technically all religious groups split humanity. Religion(s) may be good but the religious fanatical groups are like bunch of gangs with no logic at all.

How do you know that you are a guruwalla? Did Guru ever come to you and told you your behaviour is acceptable? You may think you are a guruwalla but it doesn't really mean you are. Nor anyone with short hair is a nirgura. It's more important to be honest and compassionate person than a rude religious fanatic. Do you think Gurus don't like honest, compassionate people? Then sorry too bad.

 

[kaur-1]

A Sikh follows rehat of Guru Sahib which is to take Amrit, get naam, do Amrit vela and stay away from bajjar kurehats. Rehat also includes keeping hair. Hence in Sikhi, keeping hair is not optional but a requirement. Those who don't follow rehat are not Sikhs.

Waheguru ji Ka Khalsa waheguru ji Ki Fateh

I am now more inclined (80%) to agree with the above definition of a Sikh.

I guess there is no half way. One is either a Sikh or not. At the end of the day, we should all try to be "Guru Ka Sikh".

But can one still call oneself "trying to be a Sikh ie Guru ka Sikh" keeping rehat i.e. before taking Amrit. I know we should all try and "live" Gurbani not just read as a ritual. To try and "live" Gurbani is also trying to be a Guru ka Sikh - a Gurmukh.

(20% doubt) The only 21st century problem is on paper - ie under "your religion" - what should someone trying to be a guru Ka Sikh classify oneself as? Other or Sikh?

 

[Lionchild]

The rehat maryada??? We follow that today? I don't see any mention of the SGGS in the quote. i always thought we should follow the SGGS and guru ji!

Well that is just pure BS.

 

[Veeru]

Waheguru ji Ka Khalsa waheguru ji Ki Fateh

I am now more inclined (80%) to agree with the above definition of a Sikh.

I guess there is no half way. One is either a Sikh or not. At the end of the day, we should all try to be "Guru Ka Sikh".

But can one still call oneself "trying to be a Sikh ie Guru ka Sikh" keeping rehat i.e. before taking Amrit. I know we should all try and "live" Gurbani not just read as a ritual. To try and "live" Gurbani is also trying to be a Guru ka Sikh - a Gurmukh.

(20% doubt) The only 21st century problem is on paper - ie under "your religion" - what should someone trying to be a guru Ka Sikh classify oneself as? Other or Sikh?

Is a Sikh the one who seeks the Truth (God) or is it the one has achieved the Truth (God)? Until you find an answer to this, you will not know who is Sikhs and who is not, nor you will know whether you are Sikh or not.