Maybe We Should All Rethink Our Actions To As How Far We Have Taken Sikhi From Sikhi, Rather Than Think We're All Great Sikhs

[UKLondonSikh]

People who become ego centric about their own spiritual path will drift from it themselves, don't worry about the drifters just keep your own car on the track, because if you pay too much attention to the drifters you might end up drifting aswell - i'm not saying be apathetic to them or indifferent but focus on what matters more. Besides sometimes the best way to change a group is to change yourself, many Sikhs are always on the look for great sikhs and we need people to steer us right aswell. Since we are all products of our kaum, one factor can change the collective end product. It takes one great Sikh like Baba Deep Singh to make all the rest of us shine on the world stage. But in the court of god we need our own spiritual merit. It sounds like in the example of the car engine the parts are not working well oiled, and colliding in your example. Sikhi's correction method was always that great sikhs rose, flops fell. People like Banda Singh Bahadur grew in fame, the massands, minas all became no ones from once being from the gurus families or/and the equivalent of the panj pyare system in the past.

The rehat marayada have been based off the hukams of guru gobind singh, surely the panthic singh sabha's was in the opinion of many sikhs. If you read into how the singh sabha was formed as a body during the british empire to maintain and administer gurdwaras and sikh matters, some people have called the singh sabha sell outs to the british due to a few black sheep who were abstracted and due to how the Indian government can interfere in the successors of the singh sabha, the sgpc matters. Your thread was probably closed to avoid a secterian argument that could abrupt out of disagreements on versions of history or rehat.

Guru Gobind Singh's dictations of what rehat was, was written down by various writers in rehatnama such as bhai nand lal, bhai daya singh etc. You can get books listing the known ones and what they said. There were mutal matters in them and matters Sikhs who claim from prestige sikh lineages from prestige gursikhs with oral history considered to be direct interpolation, probably the massands changing them or error in transmission. There were hukamanama written by guru gobind singh combined with various historical sources all used by people like sardar kahn singh nabha and sardar vir singh to find what was common in them all and what the hukam of sikh was and to define sikhi so as to rid sikhs of the growth of heretical groups such as deviations of the massands and other anti-panthic groups which are introduced today. Some Sikhs such as bhai randhir singh another prominent sikh is said to have disagreed on the entire panthic matters so went on latter to form a jatha whose marayada was seen as the right one but it was still considered a part of the panth because the panth marayada's bare minimum was still in line with AKJs. Other segmented groups had reformation movements which I won't name to avoid people calling me a jatha-basher or start jatha bashing all of these various groups had that basis and felt certain teachings were not accurate. Now one of the other more famous groups was slowly moved out of the limelight of the panth which was the nihangs and alot more history goes into this.

But every legitimate Sikh group can agree that the very minimum to being a Sikh is in the SGPC rehat inherited from the Singh Sabha, the other groups only deviate on technicalities but for the most part agree on it's totality as being the framework of sikhi. Other groups who fundamentally reject panthic rehat, through out the Rehat marayada of the SGPC are usually anti sikh groups like the arya samaj, rss, bajrang dal, massands, minas, noormahalia, and more groups growing.

"English people" as it is who seek those things usually take an anthropological view on the entireity of Sikhs, the english people know heresy exists in every religion. But when people study a religion they are usually more concerned with it's teachings, tenants and philosophy rather then it's deviant heresy. We have to accept the heresy exists and work it out among ourselves, our religion gives us the freedom not to follow it if we choose and most of us take small steps in the faith. Although some people stress jathabandi is equal in weight of a problem to caste, I personally in my opinion feel caste is a worse problem. Jathas existed in the time of the Gurus such as the Tarna Dal (youth group) and Budha dal (elder group), tat khalsa, sarbat khalsa had various divisions mostly based on tactically displacement for survival during harder times. Jathas exist on geographical basis now, but the problem plaguing these jathas is people seeking jathedari, president seats, positions of power in sikh religious institutions and when they don't get it they make a new gurdwara, a new jatha, a new sect, a new religion. I wonder sometimes if people are so hungry for respect why don't they earn it else where in a career or open a company and become a CEO- invest that effort else where (maybe start projects translating more sikh texts which are lying around and haven't been translated yet). The respective jathas we have, have increased the competition between them and all of that has actually overall improved over time the quallity of the parchar - that is one positive. One negative is how we don't unite in times like turban searches or sikh attacks (such as grooming gangs- people run away, hate crimes etc.)

All of our "Sikh" numerous paths converge to one point which is Guru Granth Sahib, if we accept it as the light of guru Nanak and follow it we will not differ. This was the uniting factor in the times of guru gobind singh in times of hardship after the 10th guru among puratan sikhs. Out of all of the disputes; the worst of arguments would fade because gursikhs never quarrel in front of guru granth sahib; considering it as a great sin and people's enmity were even buried - the power of gurbani also opens up the human heart (not many experience,it all maharajs kirpa and hukam, but it happens).

I think one beauty of Sikhs is how we can have our own opinion among ourselves and be free thinkers if you a group of sheeps who follow the sheep herder then you only need to defeat the sheep herder or just one sheep and you defeat all of them, because all of them share the same ideas. Let's say religion x which acts like a cult iterates a script among all of it's followers to convert people, all you need to do is defeat one person from x in debate and you defeated them all- they all think the same. In Sikhi if you defeat one person, we still have sava lakh more points. We were taught by our guru to be freethinkers and not to bow blindly before any cleric easily to become sheep easily.

Let me elaborate on the rehat issue: The sgpc rehat says you can eat meat but not halal, every other jatha agrees to this at least in some shape or form. Jathas which are pure vegetarians agree halal is a no-no but to add on to that they don't eat any other slaughter form. So they share that very basic. Nihang jathas and other factions with nihang origins promote pure jhatka and are against halal. Because of the panthic rehat both nihangs and vegeterian sikhs are both under the panthic rehat. So there rehat on that basis is one.

AKJ feel keski is a rehat, some jathas feel keski is a formality, SGPC says bare minimum is keep kesh with the other kakkars every Sikh jatha agrees keeping kesh is a requirement of khalsa so the panthic rehat is united on that issue.

The issue of how much paath and to which point to stop. Sikh jathas all say 5 banis, some say 5 banis in morning 2 after (evening and night), some tell you to do a bit more anand sahib some say do a bit more chaupai sahib stop here or there. SGPC gives the bare minimum of paath that every other jatha does anyway, any paath is better then no paath. So the panth is in agreement on the banis set to be read the least, and the SGPC encourages people reading more bani anyway.

Bibek buddhi, sarbloh rehat this is a very difficult one SGPC rehat say don't keep bibek with panthic dushmans such as massands, minas etc unless they take amrit become khalsa i.e repent. Every Sikh jatha is in agreement of that they only differ on technicalities on this matter.

So with the above technical differences we all do have on common rehat just we differ on technicalities. We do have one common rehat but many of us are still taking our baby steps before following that and in a way people are fine walking towards the guru, you walk one step, the guru takes a hundred. On the subject of marriage every jatha agrees a sikh should marry a sikh there is no difference in that rehat.

Gurusahib made the panth the guru and gave panth khalsa the power to make hukamnama and by the power of the five takht, sarbat khalsa, five jathedars and panj pyare from each takht everyone agrees with the bare minimum of the panthic rehat.

UKL = Great posts Username1 Paji. Anyone who cares about Sikhi won't focus on our differences but will consciously choose to appreciate our similar beliefs and common causes. Having said that, the whole concept of academic discussion meaning "vaad-vivaadh and automatically being bad" will leave our Qaum stagnant and incapable of reform. We need to be mature enough to discuss ALL issues with pyaar and satkaar and "agree to disagree" when that happens. If something is important to the future direction of the Panth it needs to be discussed as Guru Nanak Dev Ji Maharaj and the authors of Gurbani never hesitated to address societal or theological evils where required. I know this won't be popular but imho even aside from common sense basics such as biraderi or jathebandi divides (both of which I hate and as Giani Ditt Singh always emphasised we as a Qaum need to overcome) we should even look to see where we can possibly see common causes for societal upliftment with the various historically pro-Congress sects as that can only progress Sarbat Da Bhala faster.

[sikhiseeker]

I have done my research to and that is why I have come to the conclusion. The meat issue is not just the issue here, its all the above mentioned and if we cannot discuss these issues as you state, it causes further rifts within the Panth, we basically again do not agree, we are burying our heads in the sand and not doing any think as the new generation of Sikhs. I see cracks emerging and i want to try fill them. However, up and till we don't recognise we have issues, they will get larger and worser. The numerous segmentations are evidence of this, like you said we are three thinkers, I am not a sheep who will just simply follow someone who has sant status gained from somewhere. The reason today behind our problems is our justification of our interpretation of sikhi and the Khalsa, yet we are the youngest religion out of the 5 worlds major religions, look how segmentated we have become, due to self ego, caste and power. Again, we simply bury our heads in the sand.