Formless just like The Lord, thank you so very much...
I am very well aware that you are incapable of communicating with the formless
Sehajdhari Sikh Federation! Comments, Please
- Thread starter curious seeker
- Start date
- Replies 94
- Reads 21K
-
- Tags
- comments federation sehajdhari sikh
Formless just like The Lord, thank you so very much...
I am very well aware that you are incapable of communicating with the formless
Hey you are the one who started this part of thread with this:
It doesn't matter whether or not monas complain. Like I said, they are real saints. But those who call people names and then they claim that they believe in The Almighty Lord are simply lying about the latter. Anybody who truly believe in the The Almighty Lord will do his or her best to those who lies in name of Lord from lying...
But think about it. The author the article compared all of the non-Amritdharis to sons of prostitute. Now think about this how many people visiting this site, he was comparing to sons of prostitutes....
So you agree with me?
Who is the Author of that article? What authority he has over sikhism.Which sectof sikhism is he following?
You very well know there are many sects in sikhism and many are hardcore fanatics.AKJ is one of them.According to AKJ's me and most of my relative were never ever sikhs because we eat meat and there are several article's by AKJ authors that people who eat meat are not sikhs.
PCJ some incidents just struck in our mind.I think that article has impacted you so much
That it is not going out of your mind.I seriously Advise you to meet any psychologist or may be psychyatrist
I agree with you on what? That I cursed Amritdharis? No, I didn't curse anybody. I simply stated the facts which may sound like cursing to you. What that means is you should look into the issue more deeply as to why just simple truth sounds like cursing to you...
Well article impacted me so much that I left the religion. Regardless who wrote the article, the quote still came from your guru.
I don't need to see a psychiatrist because now I have accept the fact that gurus are not perfect. That's I refuse to accept them as my gurus. This is what Lord's will was and I have accept Lord's will.
What's troublesome is that you people are living in denial. You keep following the very same religion that doesn't recognize you and gives people reasons to call you names...
I wish you people would wake up...
No I was saying that do you agree with it that you have love hate relationship with sikhs?
So tommorow if their is another Article that convince you That islam is the only true Religion then will you convert to islam?
Nothing wrong then why spending so much time on sikh sites convincing others that you are the one who only is speaking the truth?
Sorry we people happy to be asleep we Don't need 21st century prophet PCJ to enlighten US
If One article could convince you to leave one religion The Other could convince you to convert.I just said If.
After writing this can you even call yourself a spiritual person? Muslims converted and killed
millions in the name of correcting others.White supermacists,communists killed millions and millions in name of correcting others.Before correcting others just correct yourself.
- Nov 14, 2010
- 79
- 90
Sat Sri Akal
Actually... there are Sehajdhari Christians (informally known as "liberal" or "progressive" Christians here) and Sehajdhari Jews as well (formally known as "Reform Jews" to distinguish them from "Orthodox Jews").
I am guessing that, anywhere you go in the world, no matter what faith you focus on, you will find those who are wedded to the letter of that religion's law and those who are wedded to the spirit of the religion's law, and a large number of people who fall somewhere in between.
I guess the thing I struggle with, as someone who is only just beginning to explore the Sikh faith, is this idea that God (who created the entire Universe, and that includes other galaxies and solar systems and planets, most likely with life forms that don't even remotely resemble our own) -- that HUGE enormous God who is so much bigger than our puny human brains can comprehend ... that that God would care what I do with my hair, or what undergarments I wear.
My thought is that if someone finds that that is useful to them, and it strengthens their faith, then more power to them - 5 K's all the way every day! But if someone finds those things alien, and uncomfortably foreign because they emerged from a history and culture that are not remotely their own, and might possibly even be a distraction rather than an enhancement of faith, then what God is so petty that that would be held against someone who is *otherwise* living a compassionate and exemplary life, and who meditates on God's name with every breath?
And is it really our job to judge and admonish others who do not keep to the standards we believe are most in keeping with what God wants? Shouldn't that be God's job? And if we reject those who struggle with these things, are we not guilty of putting ourselves in God's place? Are we not then demonstrating an increase in ego and a decrease in compassion?
So much of what I read about the Sikh path speaks to me on a deep soul level, but I really struggle with the matter of the 5 K's because I think what is most essential to God is invisible to the eye -- just as God is invisible to the eye.
Thank you, in advance, for any thoughts you all might have.
Siri Kamala ji
At the risk of sounding as if I do not get your most important thoughts -- I think I do -- please let me reply to two ideas that do not seem correct. They both concern the idea of sehajdhari Christians and sehajdhari Jews.
First permit me to define a practicing Sikh as one who keeps the 5 k's, is baptized and adheres faithfully to the Sikh Rehat Maryada. Without a definition the discussion will become chaotic in no time flat.
Your analogy a sehajdhari Sikh differs from a practicing Sikh just as a Reformed Jew differs from an Orthodox Jew is actually not correct.
Or better, there is no analogy. Reformed Jews are an officially recognized denomination with Judaism. Reform Judaism has a distinct and "cohesive" identity within the World Union for Progressive Judaism, along with several other recognized denominations of progressive Jews.
Progressive Jews, including Reformed Jews, are not progressive because they are "laid back" or lenient about Judaism.
"Sehajdhari" Sikhs are not an organized denomination of Sikhs with a distinct liturgy, dogma, understanding of their scripture, or ordained clergy, as found in the various denominations of progressive or reformed Judaism.
The title of the thread suggests that Sehajdhari Sikh Federation has official status as a denomination within Sikhism. That is not the case, and it is misleading. Rather, the members of this organization have public and covert ties with different groups within sanatan dharma, a purely political move which is relevant only in India. They do not represent sehajdhari Sikhs in any official capacity.
A sehajdhari Sikh differs from a practicing Sikh according to the Sikh lifestyle: does not keep the 5 k's, is not baptized, and therefore is not a strict adherent of the Sikh Rehat Maryada. There is no "sehajdhari" interpretation of Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Nor are there sehajdhari equivalents for Sikh clergy as there are Reformed rabbis in progressive Judaism. In fact, there is no clergy in Sikhism.
Now the same can be said in the analogy:
A sehajdhari Sikh differs from a practicing Sikh just as a progressive Christian differs from an orthodox/conservative Christian.
To be Christian there are only a few basic requirements. One must accept Jesus of Nazareth as the Incarnation of "God" as "God's Son" made flesh. You must accept that the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth was true and led to the deliverance of soul. You must accept that his birth, crucifixion and death is the fulfillment of a prophesy, to atone for the sins of humankind. You must accept the Christian Testament as the the word of God. There will be other requirements depending on particulars of Christian denominations - of which there are hundreds. As with Jews, Christian progressive and conservative denominations have incorporated distinctive public identities with unique liturgies, ordination of clergy, and theologies.
A progressive Christian adheres to the beliefs I listed above. The differences between progressive and conservative are many, but one major feature that divides them is the extent to which they depend on a literal interpretation of the testaments, old and new. There is no equivalent for this in Sikhi, and in fact, there are many acknowledged scholars of Sri Guru Granth Sahib who are not practicing Sikhs.
At the risk of sounding as if I do not get your most important thoughts -- I think I do -- please let me reply to two ideas that do not seem correct. They both concern the idea of sehajdhari Christians and sehajdhari Jews.
First permit me to define a practicing Sikh as one who keeps the 5 k's, is baptized and adheres faithfully to the Sikh Rehat Maryada. Without a definition the discussion will become chaotic in no time flat.
Your analogy a sehajdhari Sikh differs from a practicing Sikh just as a Reformed Jew differs from an Orthodox Jew is actually not correct.
Or better, there is no analogy. Reformed Jews are an officially recognized denomination with Judaism. Reform Judaism has a distinct and "cohesive" identity within the World Union for Progressive Judaism, along with several other recognized denominations of progressive Jews.
Progressive Jews, including Reformed Jews, are not progressive because they are "laid back" or lenient about Judaism.
"Sehajdhari" Sikhs are not an organized denomination of Sikhs with a distinct liturgy, dogma, understanding of their scripture, or ordained clergy, as found in the various denominations of progressive or reformed Judaism.
The title of the thread suggests that Sehajdhari Sikh Federation has official status as a denomination within Sikhism. That is not the case, and it is misleading. Rather, the members of this organization have public and covert ties with different groups within sanatan dharma, a purely political move which is relevant only in India. They do not represent sehajdhari Sikhs in any official capacity.
A sehajdhari Sikh differs from a practicing Sikh according to the Sikh lifestyle: does not keep the 5 k's, is not baptized, and therefore is not a strict adherent of the Sikh Rehat Maryada. There is no "sehajdhari" interpretation of Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Nor are there sehajdhari equivalents for Sikh clergy as there are Reformed rabbis in progressive Judaism. In fact, there is no clergy in Sikhism.
Now the same can be said in the analogy:
A sehajdhari Sikh differs from a practicing Sikh just as a progressive Christian differs from an orthodox/conservative Christian.
To be Christian there are only a few basic requirements. One must accept Jesus of Nazareth as the Incarnation of "God" as "God's Son" made flesh. You must accept that the resurrection of Jesus of Nazareth was true and led to the deliverance of soul. You must accept that his birth, crucifixion and death is the fulfillment of a prophesy, to atone for the sins of humankind. You must accept the Christian Testament as the the word of God. There will be other requirements depending on particulars of Christian denominations - of which there are hundreds. As with Jews, Christian progressive and conservative denominations have incorporated distinctive public identities with unique liturgies, ordination of clergy, and theologies.
A progressive Christian adheres to the beliefs I listed above. The differences between progressive and conservative are many, but one major feature that divides them is the extent to which they depend on a literal interpretation of the testaments, old and new. There is no equivalent for this in Sikhi, and in fact, there are many acknowledged scholars of Sri Guru Granth Sahib who are not practicing Sikhs.
Last edited:
So, over a period, sehajdhari body will take shape and become real. In the beginning it may be superficial like it is today.....
BTW what is SGGS ji interpretation of sikh? There is some mention in the post above which is not clear.
Is there a difference in interpretation and truth... the ultimate?
I am sure each person is different and different variant of a religion will continue to be there.... unless some BODY forces the people to follow certain religious rules.
Look within... and correct yourself.
BTW what is SGGS ji interpretation of sikh? There is some mention in the post above which is not clear.
Is there a difference in interpretation and truth... the ultimate?
I am sure each person is different and different variant of a religion will continue to be there.... unless some BODY forces the people to follow certain religious rules.
Look within... and correct yourself.
Ballym ji
Guru Fateh! Sorry if I was not clear. I did not refer to Sri Guru Granth interpretation of a sikh. What I hoped to say, and think I said, is that sehajdhari Sikhs do not have a sehajdhari interpretation of Sri Guru Granth Sahib. But... progressive Christians can and do interpret the Bible differently according to their denomination.
Also
It does in fact happen in Christianity
Guru Fateh! Sorry if I was not clear. I did not refer to Sri Guru Granth interpretation of a sikh. What I hoped to say, and think I said, is that sehajdhari Sikhs do not have a sehajdhari interpretation of Sri Guru Granth Sahib. But... progressive Christians can and do interpret the Bible differently according to their denomination.
Also
It does in fact happen in Christianity
People are forced to follow certain rules in some Chritisan denominations, or they are excommunicated, either officially or by virtue of their acts. An example, a few years back, progressive Roman Catholic scholars who adhered to something they called "liberation theology" were ordered to end their teachings or face excommunication. And some of them did it ,because in Roman Catholicism the Pope speaks as the ultimate temporal authority in matters of faith and morals. They wanted to remain Roman Catholics so they obeyed.
http://www.sikhphilosophy.net/hard-talk/33567-interpretation-of-religious-scriptures.html#post138471
THis is to inform sangat on SPN that some recent posts of this thread have been moved to
above link.
THis is to inform sangat on SPN that some recent posts of this thread have been moved to
above link.
If I may repeat some things that I said in earlier posts to put this thread into perspective. The topic is now old.
The story of the Sehajdhari Sikh Federation is old news. Somehow it picks up reactions in spite of the fact that their issues have next to nothing relevant to Sri Guru Granth Sahib, or any authentic concerns about SRM.
1. The Sehajdhari Sikh Federation is something of a non-issue for 2 reasons. Perhaps I should liken it to a lead balloon. It was formed some years back as a political block in relation to Indian politics only, and has virtually no relevance to the issues of sehajdhari outside of India. The purpose was to unify Sikhs who do not follow the Rehat Maryada and it was supposed to be a political anschlus against the SGPC prior to elections for committee seats.
The SGPC elections continually review the eligibility of Sikhs who do not keep hair as voters. A large contingent of Sikhs are sehajdhari and the federation was supposed to give them a voice.
2. The second point considers the irony that emerged. If you go to their web site and look at the contributors, founders and supporters, and also to the photo gallery, here is what you will find. A large number of members coming from Sant Samaj organizations and deras. Most of them keeping hair BTW. Babas and sants from splinter groups that have also felt "left out" because of their unwillingness or inability to follow the portions of the Sikh Rehat Maryada that forbids Hindu rituals.
Look several layers down and find out that the issue of hair was not the issue.
May I also repeat that there is no such thing as a sehajdhari interpretation of Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Apologies for being blunt, but when I said that earlier few seemed to take note.
The story of the Sehajdhari Sikh Federation is old news. Somehow it picks up reactions in spite of the fact that their issues have next to nothing relevant to Sri Guru Granth Sahib, or any authentic concerns about SRM.
1. The Sehajdhari Sikh Federation is something of a non-issue for 2 reasons. Perhaps I should liken it to a lead balloon. It was formed some years back as a political block in relation to Indian politics only, and has virtually no relevance to the issues of sehajdhari outside of India. The purpose was to unify Sikhs who do not follow the Rehat Maryada and it was supposed to be a political anschlus against the SGPC prior to elections for committee seats.
The SGPC elections continually review the eligibility of Sikhs who do not keep hair as voters. A large contingent of Sikhs are sehajdhari and the federation was supposed to give them a voice.
2. The second point considers the irony that emerged. If you go to their web site and look at the contributors, founders and supporters, and also to the photo gallery, here is what you will find. A large number of members coming from Sant Samaj organizations and deras. Most of them keeping hair BTW. Babas and sants from splinter groups that have also felt "left out" because of their unwillingness or inability to follow the portions of the Sikh Rehat Maryada that forbids Hindu rituals.
Look several layers down and find out that the issue of hair was not the issue.
May I also repeat that there is no such thing as a sehajdhari interpretation of Sri Guru Granth Sahib. Apologies for being blunt, but when I said that earlier few seemed to take note.
Well, ok lets use some technicalities shall we. A little off-topic but perhaps not.
Compared to Akali Nihang Khalsa, all non-nihangs are really sehajdharis or keshadharis if talking with regard to being Khalsa of the dal panth.. The majority of Gurdwaras out of Nihang control only keep parkash of Adi Guru Granth Sahib and not Guru Gobind Singh's bani, which more or less makes them sehajdhari gurdwaras. This also includes punjabi gurdwaras like the Akal Takht/Bunga that were forcefully taken over during the Lahori Singh Sabha movement and Dasam Granth saroops were removed.
Secondly the Khalsa fauj ie the Akali Nihangs don't follow SGPC SRM rehit maryada either, so go figure sangat ji hehe.
Compared to Akali Nihang Khalsa, all non-nihangs are really sehajdharis or keshadharis if talking with regard to being Khalsa of the dal panth.. The majority of Gurdwaras out of Nihang control only keep parkash of Adi Guru Granth Sahib and not Guru Gobind Singh's bani, which more or less makes them sehajdhari gurdwaras. This also includes punjabi gurdwaras like the Akal Takht/Bunga that were forcefully taken over during the Lahori Singh Sabha movement and Dasam Granth saroops were removed.
Secondly the Khalsa fauj ie the Akali Nihangs don't follow SGPC SRM rehit maryada either, so go figure sangat ji hehe.
- Aug 28, 2010
- 1,514
- 1,116
- 73
I feel that the classification of Sikh should be unaccepable as the concept itaself is anti Gurmati.Sikh is onky Sikh. just as Love is only Love.
Prakash.s.Bagga
Prakash.s.Bagga
📌 For all latest updates, follow the Official Sikh Philosophy Network Whatsapp Channel:
