Jump to content

Why Sikhism Failed To Spread After Nearly 500 Years?


SSD
 Share

Recommended Posts

Also, quality is not in quantity. Sikhi has spread. Its just a slow process. Its not like other religions where where u can simply state a declaration of belief or submerse yourself in water and bobs ur uncle your now a follower of the religion. Sikhis way way beyond all that.

Look at the 3ho sikhs. Granted they need a little guidance but its a start. Look at islam and the number of variations there are. The same with christianity. The fundamentals of the religion are there but they just choose to do it a little differently. Same applies to 3ho (sort of...sometimes)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But we've been more severely persecuted at the hands of the hindus!

that's not true in the time of the mughals the sikh population was approx 120,000 in Vadda and chotta ghalugharey the Khalsa population was reduced by 70% remember that is men women and children. We are more than 15 million in India and estimates are around quarter to half million sikhs were killed during the eighties and nineties we can see it is not as drastic but it feels worse because there are so few khalsey at the starting point (5-10% estimates of total sikhs) and those who were killed were predominately amritdhari/keshadhri sikhs

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The growth of our young faith was stunted by the severe persecution we faced at the hands of Muslims. Read Tauzke Jahangiri in which Jahangir himself says he did the Shaheedi of Guru Arjun Dev Jee because many Hindus and Muslims were becoming His followers. Sheikh Ahmad Sihindi who is considered a Mujadid Alf e Thani(reviver of Islam of the second millennium) by the Muslims was alarmed at seeing the growth of Sikhi as he has written in his Maktubat or collection of letters. He then conspired to have Guru Arjun Dev Jee become Shaheed through Jahangir.

After Guru Gobind Singh Jee, Sikhs faced genocide after genocide. It was literally a crime to be a Sikh back in those days. Any Sikh who was caught alive was killed immediately through beheading and his head was presented to the Mughal and later the Afghan authorities for reward money. So when Sikhs managed to finally become masters of Punjab despite this horrible persecution, Sikhs were no more than 5% of the entire Punjabi population. During Maharaja Ranjit Singh's era, Sikh faith began to spread, but still Sikhs were a minority within the Sikh state itself because Sikh rulers no longer actively spread Sikhi among the masses as they should have. If they did do parchar then at the very least central Punjab would have become a Sikh majority area.

After Punjab was conquered by the British, again Sikhi began to decline because the newly converted Sikhs who had converted during Sikh Raaj began reverting to their old faiths. During Singh Sabha movement, Sikhi again began to spread all over Punjab and had Singh Sabha movement not faced the stiff opposition from the Arya Samaj movement in Punjab at the time, it is very likely that all Punjabi Hindus would have gravitated towards Sikhi.

also jonny not to forget, that during 1900-1940ish time, sikhi had the highest number of converts and highest birthrate in n.india, its a shame partition happened when it did, coz we were in pretty gud shape then.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The reason I am asking this is because in that much time for other religions they got so much done. Christianity got Europe; Islam in 500 years got Arabia. Bhudhism in 500 years was very well spread out into southeastern Asia and Japan. So if these religions got so much in 500 years, why have we failed as followers of the highest Guru to even get outside of Punjab? Our Gurus aren't lower than these are other men!

u shud read how zoroastrians (parsis) were expelled from iran, and iran itself was FORCEFULLY conquered TWICE, 1st by arab sunnis, the by shias. South america was conquered and converted by portugese/spanish into christians, hence the old aztecs and the inca people r sumink u read in books now, not people u can meet. If maharaja ranjit singh/sikh misls/banda singh bahadur had done wat all other religious rulers done during their stints as sikh rulers, and converted every1 with the populations, then not 1 single hindu/muslim wud of been seen in 2014 north of delhi and east of the khyber pass & west of tibet! sometimes wen i see sikhs in s.asia as a lost power, it makes me at times, wish ranjit n co. did do it, but that wudnt b the sikhi/gurus way!

that's not true in the time of the mughals the sikh population was approx 120,000 in Vadda and chotta ghalugharey

that was not done by mughals, that was the afghans (nadir shah/abdali), they were hated by mughals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As for Sikhi, again, since there is no proselytizing element that manipulates/exploits/forces anyone to give up their faith. Neither did any well known king embrace Sikhi and then accelerate a conversion campaign, nor did any Sikh leader of the past oppress the masses to spread his religion.

exactly, the way maharaja dalip singh was taken away from his empire (forcing him to sign papers), his religion (made into a christian) and made to abondon panjabi/sikh lifestyle by the scummy british, was a typical tactic of foreign invaders, which is shameful to say the least. Also look at how they built that christian church tower near Darbar Sahib, in direct provocational move to prove their rubbish faith is superior to ours. The fact that Darbar Sahib is deliberatly built lower than the city of amritsar, says everyfink bowt Guru's Ramdas/Arjan Devi Jis mentality n humility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the reason why I have the opinion that Sikhi isn't merely a religion, its way more than just that. It started as a revolution by Sahib Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji Maharaj and was completed as a challenge by Dasmesh Pita Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj. The reason our numbers are so small is because the number of people who can come forward and accept a challenge is usually pretty small. In 1699 it was 5 out of 80,000.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

u shud read how zoroastrians (parsis) were expelled from iran, and iran itself was FORCEFULLY conquered TWICE, 1st by arab sunnis, the by shias. South america was conquered and converted by portugese/spanish into christians, hence the old aztecs and the inca people r sumink u read in books now, not people u can meet. If maharaja ranjit singh/sikh misls/banda singh bahadur had done wat all other religious rulers done during their stints as sikh rulers, and converted every1 with the populations, then not 1 single hindu/muslim wud of been seen in 2014 north of delhi and east of the khyber pass & west of tibet! sometimes wen i see sikhs in s.asia as a lost power, it makes me at times, wish ranjit n co. did do it, but that wudnt b the sikhi/gurus way!

that was not done by mughals, that was the afghans (nadir shah/abdali), they were hated by mughals.

I was saying the numbers of sikhs by the end of mughal era were 120,000...samaje bus itne seegee gal

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use