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
