Origins Of Ritualisms Merging Sikhi?

[guptveer1469]

As i have believed, (anti-brahminly) , that it were the brahmins/mahants who bhought ritualism into sikhi... But i was told by another sikh of another major reason which goes as follow (mainly the cast system being introduced again into sikhi, ...)

"When Guru Tegh Bahadur ji gave his shahadat for Hindu religion; the Hindus had promised Guru Gobind Singh Ji that the eldest son of their family will be a Sikh and will raise his family as a Sikh. So that is how the Chopras, the Bedis, etc became Sikhs, but their other relatives were still following Hinduism and these Sikh people were involved in almost all the Hindu ceremonies with them too. So the caste system also followed. "

Till what sense is this true?

[money singh]

that the eldest son of their family will be a Sikh and will raise his family as a Sikh.

WJKK WJKF

that is also on wikipedia "At the time of the Gurus, most North Indian families would remain Hindu while the eldest son was a "Sikh."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hinduism_and_Sikhism

[dalsingh101]

As i have believed, (anti-brahminly) , that it were the brahmins/mahants who bhought ritualism into sikhi... But i was told by another sikh of another major reason which goes as follow (mainly the cast system being introduced again into sikhi, ...)

"When Guru Tegh Bahadur ji gave his shahadat for Hindu religion; the Hindus had promised Guru Gobind Singh Ji that the eldest son of their family will be a Sikh and will raise his family as a Sikh. So that is how the Chopras, the Bedis, etc became Sikhs, but their other relatives were still following Hinduism and these Sikh people were involved in almost all the Hindu ceremonies with them too. So the caste system also followed. "

Till what sense is this true?

I'm not sure of this. If we look at caste as practised by Sikhs (yes many do especially when it comes to marriage) it seems very different to the Hindu caste system. We have to be honest to ourselves and stop blaming Hindus for this particular problem. Sikhs practise caste without any help from Hindus.

The hierarchy is completely different from the Hindu one and those castes with more open relationships with their Hindu counterparts are a small minority in the panth (by this I mean Aroras and Khatris).

In my opinion the Punjabi caste system is based on a sort of feudal system which emerged in the mid to late 1700s. Jats being the largest group in Panjab made major contributions in the struggle during this time and took most of the land ownership. This was upward mobility as they took the positions of Moghul overlords. What is surprising though is the complete absence of Mazhbhi upward mobility in terms of land acquisition. There is ample evidence that points at their contribution in Sikh battles (especially in the Banda Singh Bahadur period). So why didn't some of them get land which was apparently parcelled out on a first come first serve basis. My guess is that once external threats had diminished from the panth many Singhs soon reverted back to old practices and discarded caste free consciousness and tried to keep the power/money concentrated amongst themselves. This may well be the antecedents of the caste system in Punjab.

But it does seem to be diminishing in the UK. Today it is not uncommon for people of Sikh backgrounds to marry outside of the religion. Cross caste marriages are also occurring. I don't know what long term effect this will have on the community.

[Mehtab Singh]

There was a post about this few years ago. Some Hindu families raised their eldest son as a Sikh during British rule so that on growing up he could be a soldier in the British army and the family would live comfortably. I am not sure about the exact details but I did read something similar on this forum. I think talikhaak posted it, so maybe he can find out the post. However, before British came to India, it was probably done out of shardha for Gurujee and Sikhi. Even after 1947 the trend continued in certain parts of Punjab, but I am not sure if it is still existing after 1984.

[guptveer1469]

i witnessed in punjab sikhs who arent amritdhari still raising their eldest son as a keshdhari...

my aunts big son has it since birth and the other has haircut since birth... same with my uncles friend.. so obv it continues..

[Mehtab Singh]

But in any case your entire family is Sikh. Even if someone cuts their hair, when you ask them their religion, they still say Sikh. They are named according to Sikh customs, and have Singh as last name. I was talking about Hindu families in Punjab who raise their eldest son as a Sikh.

[rupinder singh]

As i have believed, (anti-brahminly) , that it were the brahmins/mahants who bhought ritualism into sikhi... But i was told by another sikh of another major reason which goes as follow (mainly the cast system being introduced again into sikhi, ...)

"When Guru Tegh Bahadur ji gave his shahadat for Hindu religion; the Hindus had promised Guru Gobind Singh Ji that the eldest son of their family will be a Sikh and will raise his family as a Sikh. So that is how the Chopras, the Bedis, etc became Sikhs, but their other relatives were still following Hinduism and these Sikh people were involved in almost all the Hindu ceremonies with them too. So the caste system also followed. "

Till what sense is this true?

I'm not sure of this. If we look at caste as practised by Sikhs (yes many do especially when it comes to marriage) it seems very different to the Hindu caste system. We have to be honest to ourselves and stop blaming Hindus for this particular problem. Sikhs practise caste without any help from Hindus.

The hierarchy is completely different from the Hindu one and those castes with more open relationships with their Hindu counterparts are a small minority in the panth (by this I mean Aroras and Khatris).

In my opinion the Punjabi caste system is based on a sort of feudal system which emerged in the mid to late 1700s. Jats being the largest group in Panjab made major contributions in the struggle during this time and took most of the land ownership. This was upward mobility as they took the positions of Moghul overlords. What is surprising though is the complete absence of Mazhbhi upward mobility in terms of land acquisition. There is ample evidence that points at their contribution in Sikh battles (especially in the Banda Singh Bahadur period). So why didn't some of them get land which was apparently parcelled out on a first come first serve basis. My guess is that once external threats had diminished from the panth many Singhs soon reverted back to old practices and discarded caste free consciousness and tried to keep the power/money concentrated amongst themselves. This may well be the antecedents of the caste system in Punjab.

But it does seem to be diminishing in the UK. Today it is not uncommon for people of Sikh backgrounds to marry outside of the religion. Cross caste marriages are also occurring. I don't know what long term effect this will have on the community.

Your point about the lack of Mazhabi land aquistion is very interesting during the mid history of Sikhi. I have often thought that the practice of caste started very early on in Sikh history particularly after Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj left his body and passed ownership of the decision making with the Panth. Caste has definetly been practiced as early as the time phase of Baba Banda Singh.

[proactive]

The story of Hindu families raising their eldest son as a Sikh belongs to a particular area of West Punjab around Rawalpindi before 1947. Such a custom was unknown in the Punjab east of Lahore. In these areas if a Hindu family especially Jat or Chamar during the British period was interested in Sikhi then the whole family became Sikh. Amongst Jats the Keshdharis would not marry their daughters to Hindu or Sehajdhari Jats unless they became Keshdhari Sikhs. Hindu Jats also became Sikhs to join the Jat regiments of the British army.

The reason that the custom which of the eldest son of the Hindu family becoming a Sikh is well known is that it is referred to in the so-called Hindu-Sikh Ekta articles by writers who belong to the area where it was a practice such as Khushwant Singh, Kuldeep Nayyar, Kartar Singh Duggal etc. They attempt to impose their own experiences from a small area of Punjab into an all Punjab custom which it never was. The Doordarshan myths of Sikh-Hindu Ekta which were the staple of Indian TV in the 80s such as Sanjha Chula etc belong to these writers' experiences. The common experience between the Sikh and Hindu in East Punjab pre-1947 was one of animosity between the Jat (Sikh) and the Bania (Hindu)

The reason for the custom is due to a number of reasons-;

1. The Bedi clan under Baba Kartar Singh Bedi was strong around Rawalpindi. Hindu women who did not have a child or a son would visit the Dera to get the Baba's blessings for a child. If a son was born then they would vow to bring him up as a Sikh. If other sons were born after him then they would be raised as Hindus. This is probably because the visit to the Dera was due to the longing for a first son.

2. The relations between Sikh and Hindus who were both small minorities around Rawalpindi were especially close. There was a lot of intermarriage between them. There were also occasions where a keshdhari's daughter would be married into a Hindu or Sehajdhari family and would raise her first son as a Keshdhari Sikh.

[dalsingh101]

As i have believed, (anti-brahminly) , that it were the brahmins/mahants who bhought ritualism into sikhi... But i was told by another sikh of another major reason which goes as follow (mainly the cast system being introduced again into sikhi, ...)

"When Guru Tegh Bahadur ji gave his shahadat for Hindu religion; the Hindus had promised Guru Gobind Singh Ji that the eldest son of their family will be a Sikh and will raise his family as a Sikh. So that is how the Chopras, the Bedis, etc became Sikhs, but their other relatives were still following Hinduism and these Sikh people were involved in almost all the Hindu ceremonies with them too. So the caste system also followed. "

Till what sense is this true?

I'm not sure of this. If we look at caste as practised by Sikhs (yes many do especially when it comes to marriage) it seems very different to the Hindu caste system. We have to be honest to ourselves and stop blaming Hindus for this particular problem. Sikhs practise caste without any help from Hindus.

The hierarchy is completely different from the Hindu one and those castes with more open relationships with their Hindu counterparts are a small minority in the panth (by this I mean Aroras and Khatris).

In my opinion the Punjabi caste system is based on a sort of feudal system which emerged in the mid to late 1700s. Jats being the largest group in Panjab made major contributions in the struggle during this time and took most of the land ownership. This was upward mobility as they took the positions of Moghul overlords. What is surprising though is the complete absence of Mazhbhi upward mobility in terms of land acquisition. There is ample evidence that points at their contribution in Sikh battles (especially in the Banda Singh Bahadur period). So why didn't some of them get land which was apparently parcelled out on a first come first serve basis. My guess is that once external threats had diminished from the panth many Singhs soon reverted back to old practices and discarded caste free consciousness and tried to keep the power/money concentrated amongst themselves. This may well be the antecedents of the caste system in Punjab.

But it does seem to be diminishing in the UK. Today it is not uncommon for people of Sikh backgrounds to marry outside of the religion. Cross caste marriages are also occurring. I don't know what long term effect this will have on the community.

Your point about the lack of Mazhabi land aquistion is very interesting during the mid history of Sikhi. I have often thought that the practice of caste started very early on in Sikh history particularly after Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj left his body and passed ownership of the decision making with the Panth. Caste has definetly been practiced as early as the time phase of Baba Banda Singh.

Personally i think it became stronger after the Banda Singh period. I think he pushed for caste abolition stronger than any subsequent Sikh leader. Persian accounts testify to this. There is even a famous quote about a Mazhbhi becoming a sardar on Banda's authority and returning to his own village to take charge without any challenge. Also I hear there is apparently some reference to intra caste marriage in Rattan Singh Bhangu's Panth Prakash but I haven't found it yet. People may have did this for a short time before conservative values dominated again.

I think the sheer scale of the oppression Sikhs faced in the early Khalsa days and the natural brotherhood that comes from fighting grim battles together would have done a lot to cement and foster amicable feelings in between Sikh warriors regardless of background. We know for certain that the Khalsa under Banda contained all castes including so called churah and chamars. I think that the domination of certain groups came about after all of the early battles in periods of relative peace. You know Sikhs - if there isn't someone who is halfway to achieving our demise we will usually be at each others throats. lol

[Inder Singh]

Gurbani condemns ritualism sans naam simran.That is called empty ritualism.In other words those people who want to realize God only through ritualism are mistaken.

When a religion grows,to organize it rituals have to be observed.like Guru Amardas ji asked sikhis to come to Gonidwal sahib for amawas.the purpose was to preach sikh principles to gathering.

Hindu Jats also became Sikhs to join the Jat regiments of the British army.

this is news to me.Jat regiments are hindu regiments.Sikh regiments are separate from Jat regiments.