The Difference Between Spiritual Practice And Religion

[RicktheSikh]

For the purpose of this discussion I'll define spiritual practice as methods used to achieve higher states of consciousness and connection with God through worship i.e. prayer, chanting, simran, seva, kirtan etc. I'll define religion as a codified set of requirements, rules, instructions, rituals and establishment of temporal governing bodies to exert control of the direction of a specific spiritual practice.

Guru Nanak blazed a glorious trail for the spiritual practice that we have all come to know as Sikhi but it is not evident that his intention was to create a new religion. I feel like Guru Nanak would find the state of Sikhi these days too religion-focused and severely lacking in spiritual practice.

The point I'm getting to is that I feel like religion can never elevate a spiritual practice, that it can only degrade it. Just like government legislation it becomes increasingly complex and particular about minutiae, taking away from something as simple and beautiful as a human being reaching out to their Creator. Religion also creates dogma and tends to take the spirituality out of the practice and turn it into empty rituals and idolatry. Of course, this is dependent on the individual practitioner and the intention of their efforts to reach God.

My question to all of you is: Do you think gursikhs would be better served and more likely to achieve higher states of consciousness without Sikhi as we know it? Just the bani, you, and God?

 

[Sikhilove]

For the purpose of this discussion I'll define spiritual practice as methods used to achieve higher states of consciousness and connection with God through worship i.e. prayer, chanting, simran, seva, kirtan etc. I'll define religion as a codified set of requirements, rules, instructions, rituals and establishment of temporal governing bodies to exert control of the direction of a specific spiritual practice.

Guru Nanak blazed a glorious trail for the spiritual practice that we have all come to know as Sikhi but it is not evident that his intention was to create a new religion. I feel like Guru Nanak would find the state of Sikhi these days too religion-focused and severely lacking in spiritual practice.

The point I'm getting to is that I feel like religion can never elevate a spiritual practice, that it can only degrade it. Just like government legislation it becomes increasingly complex and particular about minutiae, taking away from something as simple and beautiful as a human being reaching out to their Creator. Religion also creates dogma and tends to take the spirituality out of the practice and turn it into empty rituals and idolatry. Of course, this is dependent on the individual practitioner and the intention of their efforts to reach God.

My question to all of you is: Do you think gursikhs would be better served and more likely to achieve higher states of consciousness without Sikhi as we know it? Just the bani, you, and God?

Guru Nanaks Teaching= No Hindu, No Muslim

Ie, no religion.

It's not even a religion.

 

[RicktheSikh]

Guru Nanaks Teaching= No Hindu, No Muslim

Ie, no religion.

It's not even a religion.

It wasn't in Guru Nanak's time, but it definitely is now. Somewhere along the line between the 52 hukams of Guru Gobind Singh and the establishment of the SGPC it became one, as per the definition used in the original post.

 

[sukhsingh]

It wasn't in Guru Nanak's time, but it definitely is now. Somewhere along the line between the 52 hukams of Guru Gobind Singh and the establishment of the SGPC it became one, as per the definition used in the original post.

Bro some people may have a reductive understanding of sikhi like that but it's not the sikhi I know

 

[RicktheSikh]

Bro some people may have a reductive understanding of sikhi like that but it's not the sikhi I know

I'm just pointing out that Sikhism is, in fact, a religion.

 

[Ishna]

Very well said in your OP.

Would it be fair to said a spiritual practice is generally on an individual level, while religion is on the communal level?

Isn't it possible for a person to practice spiritually within the context of religion? Being in the community and participating in the rituals can be a spiritual exercise. It's when religion is practiced blindly and for its own sake that is becomes a problem. Do you agree with that statement?

Personally I think it's entirely possible to practice Sikhi as a spiritual or philosophical way of life without Sikhi The Religion. But without Sikhi The Religion, could Sikhi as we know it cease to exist (or never have become in the first place)? Without some organisational entity or structure to guard the integrity of the scripture and set standards for the community, Sikhi would have little to no standing as a religion.

Because if you go by Gurbani by itself, without the trappings of Sikhi The Religion, there is no Khalsa initiation. There are no turbans, and there are no 5Ks. There is no Sikh Rehat Maryada, no daily hukamnamas, no wedding ceremony or funeral rites. I think an individual can thrive with Gurbani alone in a secular society without all that, but that's my own personal opinion and I'm sure it's not a popular one.

I'm still grateful for what religious framework does exist around Sikhi though, because without it, there might not even be an identifiable Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji today.

Sorry for rambling!

 

[Ishna]

Also Sikhi - Is Sikhi A Religion?

 

[RicktheSikh]

Very well said in your OP.

Would it be fair to said a spiritual practice is generally on an individual level, while religion is on the communal level?

Isn't it possible for a person to practice spiritually within the context of religion? Being in the community and participating in the rituals can be a spiritual exercise. It's when religion is practiced blindly and for its own sake that is becomes a problem. Do you agree with that statement?

Personally I think it's entirely possible to practice Sikhi as a spiritual or philosophical way of life without Sikhi The Religion. But without Sikhi The Religion, could Sikhi as we know it cease to exist (or never have become in the first place)? Without some organisational entity or structure to guard the integrity of the scripture and set standards for the community, Sikhi would have little to no standing as a religion.

Because if you go by Gurbani by itself, without the trappings of Sikhi The Religion, there is no Khalsa initiation. There are no turbans, and there are no 5Ks. There is no Sikh Rehat Maryada, no daily hukamnamas, no wedding ceremony or funeral rites. I think an individual can thrive with Gurbani alone in a secular society without all that, but that's my own personal opinion and I'm sure it's not a popular one.

I'm still grateful for what religious framework does exist around Sikhi though, because without it, there might not even be an identifiable Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji today.

Sorry for rambling!

Thank you for your thoughtful response. Great points all around. I've been thinking about some of these same points and how my question boiled down to a "what if things were different?" question, which is a failure to accept hukum. Everything has happened exactly as it should and I'm grateful that Sikhi the religion exists because without it I probably would have never heard of Sikhi the spiritual practice.

 

[Tejwant Singh]

For the purpose of this discussion I'll define spiritual practice as methods used to achieve higher states of consciousness and connection with God through worship i.e. prayer, chanting, simran, seva, kirtan etc. I'll define religion as a codified set of requirements, rules, instructions, rituals and establishment of temporal governing bodies to exert control of the direction of a specific spiritual practice.

Guru Nanak blazed a glorious trail for the spiritual practice that we have all come to know as Sikhi but it is not evident that his intention was to create a new religion. I feel like Guru Nanak would find the state of Sikhi these days too religion-focused and severely lacking in spiritual practice.

The point I'm getting to is that I feel like religion can never elevate a spiritual practice, that it can only degrade it. Just like government legislation it becomes increasingly complex and particular about minutiae, taking away from something as simple and beautiful as a human being reaching out to their Creator. Religion also creates dogma and tends to take the spirituality out of the practice and turn it into empty rituals and idolatry. Of course, this is dependent on the individual practitioner and the intention of their efforts to reach God.

My question to all of you is: Do you think gursikhs would be better served and more likely to achieve higher states of consciousness without Sikhi as we know it? Just the bani, you, and God?

RicktheSikh ji,

Guru Fateh.

In my opinion, Sikhi is not a religion as religions are described. Sikhi does not have a god as god is described. Guru Nanak explains it quite well in the SGGS, our only Guru. Sikhi was the first "Interfaith Dialogue" long before the term was coined. As Sikhi is an idea based not personality based like other religions, hence we find writers frorm different religions/castes/races in the SGGS.

My question to you is what do you mean by, "to achieve higher states of consciousness ?"

What does that mean in lay man's terms?

What are these states and how many states are there?

Thanks

 

[Sikhilove]

It wasn't in Guru Nanak's time, but it definitely is now. Somewhere along the line between the 52 hukams of Guru Gobind Singh and the establishment of the SGPC it became one, as per the definition used in the original post.

To misguided humans yeh

If you're serious about the path of Truth, then you come to understand

It's not a religion, its the Truth. You cannot confine the Truth to a religious sect. The Bhagats of Gurbani knew this and the Gurus also most certainly did.

Don't twist it to suit your own arrogant need to be right. Read the whole of Gurbani, understand it, and come back.

 

[RicktheSikh]

To misguided humans yeh

If you're serious about the path of Truth, then you come to understand

It's not a religion, its the Truth. You cannot confine the Truth to a religious sect. The Bhagats of Gurbani knew this and the Gurus also most certainly did.

Don't twist it to suit your own arrogant need to be right. Read the whole of Gurbani, understand it, and come back.

I don't have an arrogant need to be right, I was referring to the parameters of the definition used in the original post. And if you read my response to Ishna, you'll see that I view Sikhi as both and do not have an ax to grind with either. With Guru's grace I will come to understand as you have.

@Tejwant Singh ji, I meant the Fourth state of consciousness mentioned on page 30 of SGGS ji. I made the mistake of confusing the five spiritual realms with the four states of consciousness, hence the pluralization of the phrase "higher states of consciousness". My thinking in suggesting that Sikhs could do without the religious aspect of the practice was that since attaining this fourth state of consciousness is the goal of this path, everything else could distract from the main goal. I have since reconsidered this idea. Being in the company of the Sangat and participating in the "religion" of Sikhism is faith strengthening for me and I can see that attempting to be a gursikh without some guidance from those who have traveled this path before me will not be as fruitful.

Thank you for your responses, please forgive me if I posted something you found offensive.

 

[Ishna]

Just a little detour:- The 'consciousness' reference you're talking about @RicktheSikh on page 30 doesn't actually say 'higher consciousness' anywhere in the original Gurmukhi. It is the translator's (Dr Khalsa's) interpretation. Bhai Manmohan Singh's translation of that tuk (sentence) says 'fourth state of celestial beatitude' (blessedness).

 

[RicktheSikh]

Just a little detour:- The 'consciousness' reference you're talking about @RicktheSikh on page 30 doesn't actually say 'higher consciousness' anywhere in the original Gurmukhi. It is the translator's (Dr Khalsa's) interpretation. Bhai Manmohan Singh's translation of that tuk (sentence) says 'fourth state of celestial beatitude' (blessedness).

Good to know. Thank you.

 

[sukhsingh]

I'm just pointing out that Sikhism is, in fact, a religion.

I make a distinction between sikhi and Sikhism

 

[RicktheSikh]

I make a distinction between sikhi and Sikhism

Also good to know. I've been using the terms interchangeably.

 

[sukhsingh]

Also good to know. I've been using the terms interchangeably.

It's easy to do and conflating the 2 is something that I really think about a lot.. Because at some point 'some' followers of sikhi who were Sikhs started to feel the need to 'define what it is to be Sikh'. Personally I'm not confident enough to define myself as a follower of Sikhism, because that for me so far it feels like a oxy{censored}.

 

[Sikhilove]

I don't have an arrogant need to be right, I was referring to the parameters of the definition used in the original post. And if you read my response to Ishna, you'll see that I view Sikhi as both and do not have an ax to grind with either. With Guru's grace I will come to understand as you have.

@Tejwant Singh ji, I meant the Fourth state of consciousness mentioned on page 30 of SGGS ji. I made the mistake of confusing the five spiritual realms with the four states of consciousness, hence the pluralization of the phrase "higher states of consciousness". My thinking in suggesting that Sikhs could do without the religious aspect of the practice was that since attaining this fourth state of consciousness is the goal of this path, everything else could distract from the main goal. I have since reconsidered this idea. Being in the company of the Sangat and participating in the "religion" of Sikhism is faith strengthening for me and I can see that attempting to be a gursikh without some guidance from those who have traveled this path before me will not be as fruitful.

Thank you for your responses, please forgive me if I posted something you found offensive.

Fair enough!