Khalistan

[Wales85]

So been hitting the forums pretty hard the past couple of days during breaks and noticed a lot of Khalistan talk. I can certainly understand that... I grew up with my grampy listening to IRA fight songs on the porch... but as an outsider coming into sikhi I was curious how you guys perceive this issue. I know that blue star and riots afterwords caused absolutely massive amounts of loss of innocent life, and I know that basically no justice has ever been given to victims... and that is FUBAR.... but it seems like some sikhs have engaged in terrorist activities (ie: air india flight) and I heard that lots of innocent non sikhs in punjab were/are killed b/c of this stuff.

How big is this in sikhi? How do guys feel about it?

My personal opinion is that

1. I know very little about it, and so I should be very careful in making any assumptions about it.

2. I do feel that absolutely nothing justified killing innocent people. (ex: jewish military kills palestinian civilians out the <banned word filter activated>, but i dont think that justifies killing innocent civilians to "get even", 2 wrongs dont make a right)

3. I would really like to know more about it, since it seems to be a very big deal to many sikhs. Does sikhi have an "eye for an eye" type deal when it comes to this stuff?

Not trying to be offensive to anyone, i can't even begin to be able to speak on this stuff considering how little I know... but it seems to be a big part of sikh identity and info would be appreciated...

Thanks,

Wales

[.- Prabhjot Singh -.]

Wales85, i just hope you have the stamina to reply to the flood of messages you are going to receive here

[Guest shastr]

wales bhaji, this is a very sensitive issue. and in order to understand it fully, we have to look at the root of the problem, and where things went down hill. we cant just jump into the argument by mentioning the innocent lives lost by non sikhs in punjab for "this stuff" obviously there were events that led upto bluestar and the riots, and first we have to look at those various things. and see what was really happening, rather then what is being told by media, because in those times, and still now, indian media is very biased against sikhi and shows the sikhs off as "terrorist". which is not true.

and your question about taking an "eye for eye". well that acutally is the case in sikhi. if you want, i can provide historical facts that date back to the time of sikh guru sahibs, and then after even during the mid 1700's time, the eye for eye aspect has been true in sikhi. we can get into particular events if you want.

and btw, are you a white sikh? a white non sikh? a sikh? or other? just asking because it would make it easier to answer questions knowing what ur background is.

also, there is a short book called "internal and external conflicts of the sikhs". i forget who is by, ill try to find out, but if you can get ur hands on thisi book, is a short read, and it goes over all the parts of sikh religion starting from the guru sahibs, sikh philosophy, and leads into 1984, and that whole situation. if you read this book, i think all ur questions will be answered. and it would be really easy on our part cuz it would save us all that typing.

[ladli-fauj]

for air india flight please read this----> http://sikhsinkuwait.wordpress.com/2007/08/01/sikh-youth-say-founder-not-involved-in-air-india-bombing/

and another thing the 1984 Sikh genocide in Nov. were not riots but genocide against the Sikhs, make sure you remember that the next time

[Mehtab Singh]

and your question about taking an "eye for eye". well that acutally is the case in sikhi. if you want, i can provide historical facts that date back to the time of sikh guru sahibs, and then after even during the mid 1700's time, the eye for eye aspect has been true in sikhi. we can get into particular events if you want.

There have been many instances of "an eye for an eye", but that depends on a lot of factors. Lets not forget examples like Bhai Kanhaiyya, and also Dasve Patshah helping Bahadur Shah even though Bahadur Shah's father Aurangzeb was responsible for ninth Patshah Ji's shaheedi. The rule in Sikhi is that when all ways of peace fail, thats when u pick the sword.

[ladli-fauj]

another thing, there was some corupt Sikh militants, but a lot of killings were done by police cats who were paid to be dressed up as Sikhs and kill and rob innocent people to make Militants look back and destroy the Khalistan movement.....

[Guest shastr]

and your question about taking an "eye for eye". well that acutally is the case in sikhi. if you want, i can provide historical facts that date back to the time of sikh guru sahibs, and then after even during the mid 1700's time, the eye for eye aspect has been true in sikhi. we can get into particular events if you want.

There have been many instances of "an eye for an eye", but that depends on a lot of factors. Lets not forget examples like Bhai Kanhaiyya, and also Dasve Patshah helping Bahadur Shah even though Bahadur Shah's father Aurangzeb was responsible for ninth Patshah Ji's shaheedi. The rule in Sikhi is that when all ways of peace fail, thats when u pick the sword.

thats true bhaji.

thats why "eye for eye" is bad word for this. baba jarnail singh ji used to use words like "revenge" or "answering back" which does not necessarly have to be eye for eye.

and example of eye for eye is, suppose our daughter gets raped, we go and rape that person's daughter, and that would be eye for eye. rape for rape, but thats not the case in sikhi, if daughter gets raped, we dont go and rape anybody, but we jhatka the rapist. which would prevent our other daughters from getting raped.

if our son is shot, eye for eye would be shooting other person's son, but we dont go and shoot other peoples son. we go and jhatka the shooter, which would prevent any of our other sons getting shot.

[Wales85]

wales bhaji, this is a very sensitive issue. and in order to understand it fully, we have to look at the root of the problem, and where things went down hill. we cant just jump into the argument by mentioning the innocent lives lost by non sikhs in punjab for "this stuff" obviously there were events that led upto bluestar and the riots, and first we have to look at those various things. and see what was really happening, rather then what is being told by media, because in those times, and still now, indian media is very biased against sikhi and shows the sikhs off as "terrorist". which is not true.

and your question about taking an "eye for eye". well that acutally is the case in sikhi. if you want, i can provide historical facts that date back to the time of sikh guru sahibs, and then after even during the mid 1700's time, the eye for eye aspect has been true in sikhi. we can get into particular events if you want.

and btw, are you a white sikh? a white non sikh? a sikh? or other? just asking because it would make it easier to answer questions knowing what ur background is.

white dude, see my previous post if for why i am learning about sikhi.

Honestly, I somewhat regret opening up this can of worms... I have been exposed to sikhi for a few years now through fiances family... but never been exposed to this khalistan stuff... its a part of sikhi I have never seen before and I wont lie it makes me a bit uneasy.

I realize this is mega sensitive, and you know what... I got absolutely no right/say to pass judgement on this stuff. Its complicated and there is no way to make it simple... I realize that. Punjabi politics is none of my business.

My concern is this. How big of a problem is this? Is it like with the muslims where there is a serious problem with the youth getting militant and stuff? My understanding of sikhi has been PURELY based on sikhs that I have met, and the last year or so going to Gudwara and reading english subtitles of granth, and I have never heard anything about this stuff. Especially that Air India thing... that just doesn't seem to fit with anything I know about sikhi... I mean are people like that considered martyrs?

Sikhi to me always appeared like a practical, good natured faith. I don't see how a sikh civilians death justifies a non sikh civilians death. If I kill a man, I should be punished and killed. That type of eye for an eye is ok. If I as an american kill an innocent German, that does not make it ok for an innocent American to be killed. Is this the eye for an eye concept you say is ok?

Again, no offence intended.

[adhyatmic]

Wales85 a sikh can never support such thing like air india bombings. ( though we as sikhs deny it there are terrorist elements in sikhi as there is in all religions) there is a book called soft target which is interesting it looks into the conspiracy that it was india who themshelves blew up there own plane to demean sikhs as terrorists and thus make the sikhs lose support from international community on the right to there own country.

if anyone knows of it please post it link to the ebook

[Guest shastr]

no no, we are not taliban here, where we woudl go around and kill random people for no reason and then say we are protecting our faith. thats not what sikhi is.

see post number 7. thats wat im talking about.