Should Sikhs Be Having Many Children

[Inqlabi 1]

Take the India census with a pinch of salyt they will do everything to show less numbers of Sikhs do you think India will ever show us in a true light

There are more than 25 million Sikhs but nobody wants to acknowledge that they want our image to remain weak.

Come out of wonderland kakaji .

I really missing Sarpanch that guy always have proof to show the truth.

Truth is Dalit Sikhs converting to Christanity and Sikh girls marrying Hindus .

One thingh thats has changed is presence of Non Punjabi Hindus have increased.

Many Gujratis and Maharashtrians have started coming to Harmandir Sahib.

Has anyone seen that film Idiocracy?

No, whats in that ?

[Singh559 2,656]

Converting = big no no no no no.

If we become sewadaars of the Sikh panth and humanity Sikhi will take care of itself.

"Stop these mockeries and do not talk, but live. Do not be anxious to save Sikhism. Rest assured that Sikhism can take care of itself. Your only anxiety should be to save yourself." Bhagat Puran Singh Ji

<3

[Temporary 2]

As we live in a democarcy..and a democracy is based on demographics...so in theory the majority rules...my question is should gursikhs have as many children as they can financially handle....should we be looking to have 4,5,6,... kids just to increase our population??...doesnt more numbers mean more votes which means more influence?....just look at the muslim population in britain...it jumped from 50,000 to over 2 1/2 million in just a couple of decades...should we following this route or not?? won't we feel more secure as a larger community than a smaller one...

Another example is the ultra othodox community (haredi) in israel who have on average around 6 -8 children each :0 ...this is actually worrying the secular jews in the country..because with their growing popualtion is coming growing power and influence in the government...as were seeing with the settlements in westbank and east jerusalem..

Just curious what my fellow brothers and sisters think about this...

CORRECTION: We don't live in pure democracy, there hasn't been one in existence ever... A majority rule or direct democracy will give birth to what in politics is known as "Tyranny of Majority" thus all governments recognize this thus the bicameral system of representative government we see around the developed world.. If one change that is long overdue in general old English common law countries is the system of "Checks and Balances" Jews in US recognized this thus becoming more active in politics...

Sikhs need more public policy and political scholars and activists not fundamentalists or doctors or engineers for that matter...

[clarity 52]

I feel offering rewards and incentives right now in the UK & USA is a big move forward such as a siropa to parents who even though are monay get rewarded for each childs kesh they keep as well as a reward for the child and recognition in our Sikh family.

[VanHelsingh 1,985]

I feel offering rewards and incentives right now in the UK & USA is a big move forward such as a siropa to parents who even though are monay get rewarded for each childs kesh they keep as well as a reward for the child and recognition in our Sikh family.

The siropa gets taken away and the parents get ex-communicated from the panth, if the kids stray from Sikhi when they grow up.

A desire to follow the faith and introduce children to Sikhi should be based on genuine love for the faith, from parents and children alike. I doubt the average relaxed Sikh cares a jot about a siropa, or understands its significance. Such symbols (articles?) shouldn't be handed out willy-nilly. To give them as bribes is not the way to go.

[clarity 52]

But surely parents should be acknowledged for even thinking down this road

The Jews give couples who marry into the Jewish community a free honeymmon to Israel and free tours of Israel should they relocate

Many faiths congratulate people when they join the fold

Even muslims hold a feast when someone converts

Surely the least we can do is congrtulate parents publicly for taking a stand

[VanHelsingh 1,985]

I suppose.

[SevadaarEKhalsa 37]

First of all, I am happy that Sikhs have started giving some importance to numbers. Quality over quantity any day, yes. But with quantity we could get benefits for the quality Sikhs. By numbers we could get subsidies from several governments in the west, which could be used for Parchaar and betternment of Sikhi. More people would know about us and there would be less ignorance about Sikhi in the world.

If you have between 2 and 5 children, it is all good. But this is only of use if you can assure them a good worldly and Sikhi education (meaning that you need to be financially stable).

But if we want to increase our numbers tremendously, why not think of this :

Guru Nanak Sahib did 4 Udasis, where each time they visited a specific region and preached the Truth (Sikhi) there. This way the Sri Lankan King, Shiv Nabh, embraced Sikhi and appointed missionaries to spread Guru Nanak Sahibs message far and wide in his Kingdom. Many other Sikh communities were established all over Asia (Uzbekistan, Iraq, Afghanistan, ...)

After Guru Nanak Sahib, the community of Punjab (mostly in Majha region) lost contact with these Sikhs outside the Indian sub-continent. Most of these (if not all) reverted back to their previous beliefs in the course of time.

1. Several tribes became Sikhs of Guru Nanak Sahib in India. They live outside Punjab so had little or no contact with Sikhi afterwards. Some of them do have Guru Granth Sahib, but most of them don't have the Sikh appearence (no turban and beard). Some of these tribes include Vanjaras, Lobanas, Satnamis (mostly became Sikh under time of Guru Tegh Bahadur), etc.

2. Several tribes became Sikh after Guru Nanak Sahib, such as the Sikligars (originally from Rajasthan) who made weapons for 6th Guru, Guru Hargobind Sahib and lateron became Sikhs. These Sikhs do have beards and turbans, mostly due to the fact that their ancestors passed one saying 'baal nahi katane, chahe jaan chali jaye' (do not cut your hair, even if your life is at risk). So basically even they have no knowledge of Gurmat, Sikh itihas, Gurbani, …

Both sort of tribes (1 & 2) live in utterly bad conditions. Most of them survive with less than 1$ a day. Many of them are forced to sell toys, hand made knives, etc on streets, even this has became difficult after Chinese made cheap stuff is preferred by the clients. They have no acces to clean drinking water, education, etc. Some of them have cut there hair, and many have been converted to other religions, especially Christianity.

From my research these tribes number anywhere between 5 and 15 million.

Why are these people not in the census ? Well Census India counts them under 'Tribals' section or even 'Hindu' section.

Same way Pakistan has about 30,000 Sikhs. Sikhs in Northern Pakistan are well off due to business but are constantly threatened by Taliban and have to pay a monthly tax of 1100 rupees per person.

Situation in West Punjab and Sindh/Baluchistan provinces is bad. Most of the Sikhs are poor. Many of them were 'lower caste' ex-Hindus who embraced Sikhi in the 1970s. The 'higher caste' better off Sikhs in these provinces don't help these Sikhs. One of these tribe includes the Baagri tribe who live in Northern Sindh especially.

Total number of these Sikhs is anywhere between 3,000 and 6,000.

Besides that many Christians and Hindus have been embracing Sikhi, we need to do more parchaar there (in Pakistan). Many lower caste Hindus would easily embrace Sikhi if they get to know about Gurmat and Sikh history.

What do you all say ? Do we need to help these Sikhs or not ?

We, Sevadaar e Khalsa, thought that we need to help these poor Sikh brothers and sisters. As of now, our first mission is in Pakistan. After solving the issues of Pakistani Sangat we shall focus our shift on the poor Sikh tribes of India.

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa

Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh

[Bored 7]

future generations will be adopting the western cultures of only 1-2 kids per house hold but i do agree, we should be having more kids

[11Gurus1Jot 176]

future generations will be adopting the western cultures of only 1-2 kids per house hold but i do agree, we should be having more kids

I agree we've got to keep the quality, not just the quantity.

What are your views on non-Sikhs coming into Sikh as full Amritdhari Sikhs?

[proactive 2,062]

This is an interesting discussion and one that should be a cause for concern for all Sikhs.

Nothing is guaranteed in life, no one can know whether their children will end up as Gursikhs or Manmukhs but that shouldn't stop us from having more children. It is generally accepted that having 2 children is the replacement level of a population group which means that if all married Sikh couples have 2 children each then the Sikh population will remain static and not increase. Less than 2 children and the population will actually decrease. This is the case in most European countries where their populations are decreasing. In the UK the population has only increased because of the large number of immigrants from eastern Europe and from other parts of the world. You need a genocide to destroy a people nowadays, just promote contraception and make a less than 2 children the norm. In our parents generation 4-6 children were the norm, In fact out of 4 uncles in my family, 1 did not marry, 2 had 8 children each and one had 3 children. That's an average of 4.75 which will double the population every 40 years. This is the one of the reasons, the other being through conversion why the Sikh population before 1947 always increased by a higher percentage than the Hindus and even the Muslims! Apart from 1951 when the Sikh losses suffered during the partition showed that the Sikh population increased by a small percentage the Sikh population up to 2001 always increased by more than the Hindu population.

I remember that in the late 80s the Kharkoos during their Samaj Sudhar movement banned the use of contraceptions and urged Sikhs to have more children. This is probably one of the reasons that the Sikh population increased from 60.19% of the total population of Punjab in 1981 to 62.95% in 1991. After the time the Sikh population has decreased to 59.95% due to outmigration by Sikhs, inmigration by non-Sikhs and the preference for smaller families. Sikh organisations should be actively encouraging Sikhs to have more children.

Apart from the natural increase, there is great scope to increase the Sikh population through conversion. SewadaarEKhalsa has given information about the different tribal groups who have a tendency to veer towards Sikhi. There are already a number of organisations that work with these groups but there is scope for their activities to be increased.

A good site giving information on these groups is-;

http://www.forgottensikhs.com/

[11Gurus1Jot 176]

It also depends on one's finances too. You can't condemn somebody for having a couple of kids if they can't afford to have anymore. That's irresponsible and does more damage to the children they do have in the long-term. Its not all about increasing the ranks of a population.There's such an issue as social responsibility.

If we can guarantee the children will grow up to be Gursikh, then go for it. Until such an enlightened time arrives, we'd just be introducing more confused and lost kids who are Sikh by name only.

Also, if anyone is expecting a generation of 'Guru Ke Laadle' from the very people who are ashamed of giving their children Sikh names, well then that's naive. The type of names I've heard the generation before mine (the 30+ age group) give to their kids is an absolute disgrace. Muslim, Hindu and Christian names given to Sikh children whilst the impotent elders stand-by and do nothing.

@ Kuljugi - Excellent point!!!

On this point alone - I apologise if I have ever come across as having a go at you.

[VanHelsingh 1,985]

@ Kuljugi - Excellent point!!!

On this point alone - I apologise if I have ever come across as having a go at you.

Oh, well thank-you for granting me the opportunity to revel in your wisdom. I hope I will not have to wait too long for a similar moment of graciousness.

There's two ways to look at the situation. The first is through misty-eyed, Sikhi-infused passion where all that matters is the pumping out of kids no matter what. To hell with common sense and responsibility, I want to litter the planet with my offspring even though I and my wife could be two of the most disgustingly cretinous individuals to have ever walked this earth. As long as the kids have joore and mini-dastaars on their wee little heads by the time they're 7, I've got first-class entry to Sachkhand because there's two more Sikhs in the world and that's all Akal Purakh cares about(!) Whose genes have they got? Whose values and behaviour have they followed and seen since childhood? Certainly nothing positive if the parents themselves are poor role models. So if the parents don't make a concerted effort to not only look like true Gursikhs but also behave like true Gursikhs, then how will the children fare any better?

The second is the true situation "on-the-ground" taking into account various factors including financial capabilities, quality of life, love for the child / children, educating them about the faith, etc.

Without writing an essay, I personally feel that Gursikhs should have more than one child, depending on whether they feel they have the desire and patience to adequately pass on their values (religious and otherwise) to their children, and if they are willing to invest a lot of time and love into educating their child about the faith. It's not about crapping out a couple of kids, taking them to the Gurudwara a few times a week, and enrolling them in Panjabi class and then hope that Waheguru does the rest.

If its purely a numbers a game, then go for it. I can see which way this world is heading, and its not towards Sikhi. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing as it sorts the wheat from the chaff. But unless you're willing to invest time and effort into instilling Gursikh values into your children, don't be surprised if they grow up to be feeble-minded, weak-willed manmukhs, or of the like that are swanning around on scooters and Hero Honda's in Panjab at the moment. Or even worse - they could be manmukhs hiding behind Gursikh saroop. But I suppose for some people that doesn't matter for as long as people look the part that's all that counts, ey?

[11Gurus1Jot 176]

. So if the parents don't make a concerted effort to not only look like true Gursikhs but also behave like true Gursikhs, then how will the children fare any better?

Or even worse - they could be manmukhs hiding behind Gursikh saroop. But I suppose for some people that doesn't matter for as long as people look the part that's all that counts, ey?

Yes, Or even worse - they could be the Manmukhs who say that "Guru Gobind Singh Ji was wasting his time when he took Amrit from the Panj Piyare, and did not cut his hair, and wore the 5 K's. You know, those Manmukhs who compete with Guru Gobind Singh Ji himself by trying to say that Sikhs don't need to do what Guru Gobind Singh Ji did, and told us to do, ey?

By the way, are you a brother or a sister?

[VanHelsingh 1,985]

Yes, Or even worse - they could be the Manmukhs who say that "Guru Gobind Singh Ji was wasting his time when he took Amrit from the Panj Piyare, and did not cut his hair, and wore the 5 K's. You know, those Manmukhs who compete with Guru Gobind Singh Ji himself by trying to say that Sikhs don't need to do what Guru Gobind Singh Ji did, and told us to do, ey?

By the way, are you a brother or a sister?

You really do need to stop putting words in my mouth. Are you suggesting I am - for one second - saying what you wrote above?

Either you've done it innocently without understanding that the above response is suggesting I believe in such things, OR you've done it deliberately to cause trouble. So which one is it?

Also, in what I've written in my original post what is so wrong that has so obviously upset you? The belief that its important to not only look the part of a Sikh but also be a Sikh from within? Is this wrong?