Sikh Population In Punjab Is 57 % Which Was 60% In 2001 Census.

[singh_comradz 87]

We have no nation, no base, no Raaj. Is it any surprise that the Sikh quam is in decline?

Raj bina neh Dharam chale hain
Dharam bina sab dale male hain

[Balkaar 1,339]

I agree.

But fertility decrease due to hedonism is an influence of Western influence.

Also, I do not believe that 75% of entire population in punjab is addicated to drugs. In some areas, may be. But over-all, I have seen no credible statistics on drug use in Punjab.

Can you share some credible statistics from well-established sources on drugs?

Not 75% of the entire population. 75% of the youth population. Some estimates come in at around 70%, it isn't altogether impossible that the true figure is slightly higher.

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/drug-abuse-another-punjab-study-too-pegged-it-at-70/

http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/how-use-turned-to-abuse-in-punjab/31353.html

Reduced fertility has nothing to do with the hedonism supposedly attached to Western culture. It has everything to do with increasing affluence. Wealthier people tend not to have many children, because they don't need a surplus of sprogs in the same way that some impoverished farmer does.

[Ranjeet01 2,141]

Not 75% of the entire population. 75% of the youth population. Some estimates come in at around 70%, it isn't altogether impossible that the true figure is slightly higher.

http://indianexpress.com/article/india/india-others/drug-abuse-another-punjab-study-too-pegged-it-at-70/

http://www.tribuneindia.com/news/how-use-turned-to-abuse-in-punjab/31353.html

Reduced fertility has nothing to do with the hedonism supposedly attached to Western culture. It has everything to do with increasing affluence. Wealthier people tend not to have many children, because they don't need a surplus of sprogs in the same way that some impoverished farmer does.

So we have one section of Punjabi society that are having less children due to affluence and this has an impact in the fertility replacement rates for Sikhs.

We have another section of Punjabi society that is poor and are not receiving help and therefore accept help from Xtian evangelist groups with bribes and other enticements.

We have the claim of the majority of the youth (I expect would cross all social classes) are drug dependent, the ones who are not are the ones that have emigrated.

[Ranjeet01 2,141]

So we have one section of Punjabi society that are having less children due to affluence and this has an impact in the fertility replacement rates for Sikhs.

We have another section of Punjabi society that is poor and are not receiving help and therefore accept help from Xtian evangelist groups with bribes and other enticements. Would this section be the ones that have more children?

We have the claim of the majority of the youth (I expect would cross all social classes) are drug dependent, the ones who are not are the ones that have emigrated.

[KhoonKaBadlaKhoon 777]

religious,believe me this khalistan concept is having negative impression..non sikhs,who used to c us as warriors have started seeing people with beard as hardliners..it is my humble to request to all my fellow sikhs not to propagate this idea atleast when religion itself is under threat.. rather that make NGOs like khalsa aid which is gaining ground in India nd help people,here people means every Indian,this will help us to gain the lost ground again..nd its also possible this neeshkam sewa concept may make them to convert to sikhism.. nd of course prachar of our gloroius history which is no doubt going good

thank you

Who cares what they view us as, with their history, their judgement is insignificant. But, despite the fact that I am pro Khalistan, I agree with you that now is not the time for Khalistan. We need to become stronger first with good leadership, a Khalistan right now would instantly fall into civil war. You can bet India and Pakistan, hell maybe even China will flood the states with arms so their friends come to power.

[DTF 160]

Guru Sahib himself said, "One who calls himself a Sikh of the Guru, the True Guru, shall rise in the early morning hours and meditate on the Lord's Name." If sikhs aren't even attempting to follow the Guru why should they be included?

Following that line of logic (true) Sikhs constitute not much more than 2% of the Punjab population.

The Sikh Panth includes non-GurSikhs.

2% minorities don't really tend to be able to defend themselves against state sponsored Genocide and discrimination.

One question no body asks is whether the native Hindu Punjabi population in decline?

Undoubtedly they have Ranjeet but due to their billion plus co-religionists we don't always perceive this.

We need to strive to include all so-called HP's that attend Gurdwara as fellow Sikhs to reduce native HP numbers further to boost our own. Essentially we need to turn Hindutva tactics back on those that hate Sikhs.

SGPC is a religious organization that is there to administer the running of Gurdwaras around the world. I'm talking about a powerful international social organization that also acts as a lobbying agent like AIPAC for Israel.

= Agreed bro but with new corruption-free transparent management and an expanded remit it could potentially perform that role.

This is a problem that cannot be solved via politics. Your guy winning may help but it won't solve the fundamental

= Agreed. But so long as Badal or Amrinder are CM change will not occur. HS Phulka Ji is the only credible candidate I would trust to ensure the clean up.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here but I'm guessing you're referring to those Hindus who also attend Gurdwara, then I firmly disagree. No thanks. I'd rather be a super minority then a majority with some sort of 'mongrelized' version of Sikhism. I'm assuming recognizing them entails allowing them to vote in Gurdwara affairs? Sorry, no way buddy. Our Gurdwaras will be turned into Mandirs. No thanks.

= Sikhi won't become diluted due to a greater number of adherents bro. Anything contrary to Gurmat would not suddenly be permitted as Panj Piare would head a new cleaned up version of the SGPC.

Sorry poor comparison. Christianity is not facing the problem of refusal of being given a separate identity like Sikhism.

= Our identity is unstoppable and unbreakable. We need to get consitutional recognition yes but by fools defining all those without kes as Hindu's that does not make it so. In fact we need to turn the tables and strive to include as many possible within the Sikh Panth and exclude them from the Hindu fold. How can those who attend Gurdwara or those discriminated by the Hindu caste system ever be defined as Hindu's when they are natural members of the Sikh Panth!

Alcohol does not destroy any nation. The most powerful nations on this planet ie Western civilization and Asian (China, Japan....) are all alcohol drinkers. This is nonsense perpetuated by backward Indian mentality. A tiny bunch of alcohol drinkers called the British came to India and kicked everybody's asses.

= I don't really care about the others you mention but I care about the Sikh Panth and anybody can see the negative impact it has on our people brother.

IMHO what is destroying us selfishness. If you travel to the UK, US, Canada, Asia...you'll see Sikhs doing extremely well yet I don't see any monetary help given to fellow Sikhs in Punjab outside of Gurdwara donations.

= Agreed

Ironically one of our first Hukam is 'Wand Ke Shekaoo'. If we follow this Hukam to the tee brother, I guarantee you we will become really strong and un defeatable.

= 100% agreed

But then again, who do we have to replace the Badals even? Its a dire situation.

The best Gursikh candidate to defeat the Badals in 2017 is HS Phulka Ji of the AAP.

The AAP already hold all four Malwa MP seats.

Just note for Sangrur, Muslims are up from 7.89 % in 2001 to 10.82% in 2011. This is the area that includes Malerkotla and has become the hub of the likes of Izhar Alam who are converting Sikhs to Islam and facilitating Gujjar Muslim immigration into Punjab by building them colonies and Sharia Panchayats.

Exactly SikhKosh Ji. Sher Singh Ghubaya (MP for Firozpur) as a Sikh of Gujjar ancestry himself has spoken of the urgent need for parchar to Gujjars given that we do not utilise Mata Gujjar Kaur's ancestry as an educational inroad to facilitate greater parchar to them.

Agreed, even there are only 10% genuine Sikhs in just Punjab the entire state would probably be at the very least less with the problem of Paap.

The problem is we are not significantly better than other communities. The British ruled all of India with 100,000 men. My conclusion from our dire state is that perhaps we do not possess even 100,000 true Gurmukhs in Punjab as I firmly believe that every one of our problems can be solved via our own individual commitment aligned with like-minded Sadh Sangat.

To be honest if u look at the demographics of that link provided, im not too concerned by the muslim population ppl keep on mentioning.

= Bro the number of Muslims in east Punjab at 2% (up from 0.2% in 1947) is not the problem. What is alarming is that Muslim numbers grew by 40% in the ten years between 2001 to 2011 whilst our own numbers declined. And we both know Sikhi is the 100% Truth whilst Islam is patently and obviously a concocted falsehood.

christians now in panjab, yet in that census, it shows their numbers r barely 350k.

= But again bro even though the Christian numbers are not huge, how can a clearly fake cult which believes in the virgin birth of Jesus see 20% population growth in the ten years between 2001 to 2011 whilst we regress. We need to target all Christians to come to the Truth of Sikhi rather than expand.

To be honest after looking at the demographics, im not too dismayed by it, condidering we r killing ourselves via drugs, female foeticide, mass immigration to foreign lands, cancerous water, alcohol etc,

= Agreed bro we don't need to cry about our situation but we certainly need to collectively act as this is a serious wake up call given the serious danger that our opponents are going all guns out to turn us into a minority by the time of the 2021 census.

i expected our numbers to be MUCH MUCH lower, esp the way 'DTF' keeps sayin. Having said that, whats in store for the next 5-10yrs, who knows? But the biggest threat is defo, the hindu/dera population.

= Exactly bro the Balmiki and Dera Ballan apartheid madirs franchises operated and funded by Hindutva paymasters is the primary threat.

I remember reading the sikh population was at 13million once, and the hindu at 6million about a decade ago, yet they r catchin up bigtime!

= Exactly in 1991 the Sikh percentage was 63%. Then when it fellow to 60% in 2001 projections were made that we Sikhs would become a minority by 2031. Now that the deliberately delayed figures for 2011 show us at 57% back in 2011 and my personal estimate being that we are around the 56% mark currently in 2015, we need to take action. Biraderi apartheid has to be eradicated, single Sangat Gurdwara's are absolutely vital, matrimonial apartheid has to be destroyed and Sikhs need to exit the whole reservation system which is issuing caste based birth certificates to divide and rule. If we cannot manage such simple things as Sikhi orders us to follow we will only have ourselves to blame if we become a minority by the time of 2021 census.

Biharis have made a huge impact, no question, such a shame they r not bein converted into sikhi in larger numbers, but wat can u do, wen sikhi is dead in panjab?

= We have to revive Sikhi bro. Instead of fools classifying Bihari's as Hindu's simply because they are sehajdhari we need to do massive parchar, ensure humane labour conditions and educate all Bihari incomers about where Dhan Dhan Guru Gobind Singh Ji was born, what Sikhi stands for (Sarbat da Bhala) and where Bhai Jiwan Singh Ji came from and the unmatchable bravery they showed. Far from Bihari numbers being a threat, we can positively use them to increase the numbers of Sikhs and indeed back in Bihar.

Agreed, parchaar directed at the bahmans is the answer. As well as securing the future of our own nation, our parchaaraks would be doing the Hindus a favour liberating them from their stupid, stupid superstitions.

Us constantly railing at Brahmins is not helping us communicate the great examples of Gurmukhs like Shaheed Bhai Mati Das Ji and Shaheed Bhai Sati Das Ji. Particularly since a huge percentage of the Amritdhari Sikhs in Jammu & Kashmir and Uttarakhand are of originally Brahmin ancestry. Granted that the present PM of Pakistan is also of 100% Brahmin ancestry and so are most of the Pakistan flag waving Kashmiri leaders in India but we still desperately need to do more parchar to the Brahmins rather than simply railing against them on a generalised basis imho.

We have no nation, no base, no Raaj. Is it any surprise that the Sikh quam is in decline?

No nation, no base and no Raj will ever occur any time soon if we become a minority in Punjab by the 2021 census.

So all of us Sikhs need to unite and to smash biraderi and jatha-based segregation within the Panth straight away.

Without addressing the problems of female infanticide, drugs, biraderi apartheid, illiteracy, cancer, poverty, alcohol addiction as primary priorities no Raj will ever occur. Once we have a 100% united, 100% literate people, 100% free from drugs Raj will become 100% inevitable - and not just in Majha and Malwa where we still remain a majority but througout all of India (as a pre-cursor to global Khalsa Raj - which means rule via justice for all).

[proactive 1,871]

The census with regard to the Sikhs appears to have been tampered with mainly due to political considerations. The last census before the 2011 one was held in 2001 and it was held during the BJP coalition in power in Delhi. Historically the BJP has always sought to promote the belief that the Sikhs would eventually become a minority in Punjab whether they are actively trying to achieve or just promoting this in order to take power in Punjab. Just after the creation of Punjabi Suba the Hindu press in Punjab which is run by Hindus associated with the BJP started to promote the belief that the Sikhs who according to the 1961 census were 56% in the Punjabi Suba area would eventually become a minority. The 1961 census had been tampered with both by the government as well as by Hindu parties seeking to inflate the Hindu numbers in order to deny the Sikhs Punjabi Suba. The 1961 census report contains such blatant falsehoods as half of the Mazhabi Sikh population in Amritsar district as Hindu! This falsehood could not be carried over into the 1971 census because the Akali leadership having won the new Punjabi state would be vigilant of any manipulation of the census figures. In every census since then the Mazhabi Sikhs have been listed as Sikhs with a percentage of 98.5%.

In 1991 also there also could not be large scale tampering with the Sikh figures as any attempt to deflate them would have used by human rights organisations to point to the fact that the Sikh losses were due to the genocide suffered by the Sikhs in 1984 and after. The Sikh numbers were in fact inflated naturally because the Hindus in Punjab in many cases put their religion as Sikh. Only in 2001 was it possible for the BJP to tamper with the Sikh figures. They had a so-called Panthic government in Punjab which could not care less about the Sikh numbers. The census was held during the BJP rule and thus the Sikh figure was shown to have been affected thus. The census figures were released a few months after the Congress took over from BJP in 2004.

The Hindu population in Punjab has always been on decline ever since the first reliable census was taken by the British in 1881. The Hindus lost numbers to both the Sikhs and Muslims between 1881-1941. Only between 1951-1961 did the Hindus increase by more than the Sikhs and this was due to large number of Sikhs belonging to Mazhabi and other castes being counted as Hindus rather than Sikhs and also the migration of Sikhs from Punjab to other states. The Sikhs started to increase by more than the Hindus from 1971-1991. Even though large numbers of Sikhs migrated out after 1971 the Sikhs still increased by more than the Hindus.

The 2001 and this census appear to have been manipulated and Sikh numbers deflated. Here are some of the reasons why.

1. While Sikhs in India were shown as increasing only by 18% between 1991 and 2001, but the increase was uneven. In Punjab the Sikhs increased by only 14.3% (from 12.767M to 14.592M) but outside Punjab in the rest of India the Sikhs increased by 32.4%!! (3.492M to 4.623M). So unless there was large scale migration of Sikhs from Punjab to other states of India then the figures do not look correct. As the period 1991-1995 was one of intense persecution of Sikhs it is unlikely that Sikhs would have been migrating from Punjab to other states.

2. In the 2011 census the Sikh population is shown as increasing by 9.67% in Punjab but outside Punjab the Sikh population is shown as increasing by only 4.45% !! Now the reason usually given for the fall in Sikh numbers in Punjab is migration and female foeticide. But does this mean that the Sikh population in states where the Sikh population increased by more than Punjab between 1991-2001 have suddenly started to have less children or started to commit female foeticide on a mass scale? This is highly unlikely and there is no mass migration of Sikhs from these states to outside India as there is in Punjab. To shown how dubious the figure for Sikhs outside of Punjab is , consider this the census authorities of India would want us to believe that even though Sikh population in Punjab is facing problems like female foeticide and migration the Sikh population still managed to increase by double the percentage as the Sikhs outside of Punjab!

3. The most surprising figures for Sikhs is that in states like Rajasthan where Sikhs had increased by percentages such as 26% between 1991-2001 have suddenly only increased by 6.6% between 2001-2011.

In 2004 when the religion figures were released the Delhi Gurdwaras committee did a survey to verify the figures as they stated that the figures for Delhi with regard to Sikhs had been deflated. Here is a report from that time-;

Popular Sikh leader Manjit Singh, son of slain Akali leader Jathedar Santokh Singh, told a special meeting of the Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee (DSGMC) over Census reports that his March-2002 sample survey of the community's population in a designated locality had also showed that no Census official visited most of the Sikh homes there.

''The survey was commissioned by a reputed firm in MCD Ward No 22 in 2002. The data, for instance, we collected from Krishna Park Extension points out that out of a total 402 Sikh homes, 210 respondents said no Census official had visited them. Fifty-eight said they were even not aware of any Census count,'' Mr Singh, also a senior member of the DSGMC, observed.

The sample count, a rare move of its kind by a community, came after ''we received credible information that our size was being under-estimated,'' he added

The Sikhs In Delhi who increased by 18% percent between 1991-2001 and now being shown in this census as only increasing by 2.7%!! (0.555M to 0.570M)

It is possible to look at other ways to test whether the census was reliable. For Delhi, if we look at the electoral roll for the Gurdwara elections which were held in 2013. According to Gurdwara elections commission the total number of registered voters for the elections were 415,708. This would be all Sikhs 18 and over resident in Delhi in 2013. To find out the percentage of Sikhs in the age group 0-17 we can use the figures for Delhi in 2011 but deduct the difference between the Sikhs in that age group in 2001 which was 7% less. 33% of the population of Delhi was 0-17 years old and this leaves 26% as the percentage of Sikhs in that age group. This means that there were 523,000 Sikhs in Delhi in 2013. But we still then have to add the number of those who did not register as well as those not eligible as they were not Keshdharis. If we take this number to be about 35% then the number of Sikhs in 2013 in Delhi comes to be 705,000 and not the 570,581 as listed in the census.

Another piece of data that can be used in the language data. Sikh population in Delhi has been roughly at a ratio of 3:5 (60%) to the population of Punjabi speakers. In 1991 there were 748,145 Punjabi speakers in Delhi and 455,657 Sikhs. In 2001 the Punjabi speakers went up by 32% to 998,890 but the Sikhs only went up by 22% to 555, 602. The thing to consider is whether more non-Sikhs started to list their language as Punjabi between 1991 to 2001. This appears unlikely although about ten thousand Hindus did migrate from Punjab to Delhi in the early 1990s due to the violence there. But this is such a small number given that the difference between Sikhs and Punjabi speakers went from 292,468 to 433,378. Had the Sikh to Punjabi speaker ratio remained the same in 2001 then the number of Sikhs in 2001 would have been 600,000 and not 555, 602 as listed by the census.

The DSGMC needs to use it's resources and verify if the census data is correct or not because this data is used to allocate resources.

[proactive 1,871]

Apart from the deflated number of Sikhs in Punjab what is also concerning is that Sikhs appear in states where over the last few censuses had increased by a larger percentage than the ones in Punjab have now according to the census data started to grow at a lesser percentage.

As we know Punjab suffers from female foeticide as well as migration of Sikhs to countries abroad. So one would assume that Sikhs in Punjab would grow at a slower rate than the ones in states where there is less or no report of foeticide as well as little migration to other countries. Take for instance Rajasthan. Between 1991 to 2001 the Sikhs here increased by 26% while the Sikhs in Punjab only increased by only 14.3% But between 2001 to 2011 the Sikhs in Rajasthan increased by only 6.6% while the Sikhs in Punjab increased by 9.67%.

There figures appear unlikely because if we look at the Sikh population in the age groups 15-29 or those who are likely to be married and have children between 2001-2011 for both Punjab and Rajasthan it shows who unlikely the census figures are. In Punjab 23.89% of Sikhs were of that age group. In Rajasthan it was 27.2%. Absolute numbers (ie Sikh numbers in Punjab being 18 times more than the Sikhs in Rajasthan) do not matter here as we are looking at percentage increases and not increase in absolute numbers. So the above figures shows that not only more of the Rajasthan Sikhs were in the age groups likely to have children and hence increase the Sikh population but because the Sikh numbers in Punjab also suffered from migration, these very age groups in Punjab were the ones that were likely to migrate to foreign countries and thus not contribute to increasing the Sikh population in Punjab. Also the drug issue is less in these states than in Punjab.

The same is true of Haryana, the Sikhs in this age group were even more than in Rajasthan at 28.06% but they also increased by 6.24% less than the Sikhs in Punjab and Rajasthan! Only in Uttaranchal state did the Sikhs increased by more than those of Punjab 11.46% and had about 28% in the age groups 15-29.

[Quantavius 141]

= Sikhi won't become diluted due to a greater number of adherents bro. Anything contrary to Gurmat would not suddenly be permitted as Panj Piare would head a new cleaned up version of the SGPC.

You sound young and naive. All these Hindus need are enough numbers and in key positions (since they're able to vote) they will then exert power and remove 'Pro Sikhi' Panj Pyare and install their own 'Pro Hindu' Panj Pyare. It's that simple and that would be the beginning of the end. It will happen slowly but surely. In time, our Gurdwaras will resemble Mandirs.

= I don't really care about the others you mention but I care about the Sikh Panth and anybody can see the negative impact it has on our people brother.

You should. If the impact is so negative why all the major inventions on this planet from the West ie alcohol drinkers? Why is India so backward? I'm sorry but you have a skewed perception of reality.

Until people like you wake up from this stupidity ie believing that banning alcohol will suddenly magically create this 'renaissance' of Sikhism, we will never move forward.

[DTF 160]

Proactive Bhai Sahib excellent posts as always.

I fully agree with you that Sikh numbers have deliberately been deflated by the centre in every census all the way between between 1951-1991 particularly by excluding sehajdhari non-Punjabi Sikhs.

However, I am not sure if our numbers in Punjab have been deflated in 2001 and 2011.

In fact my suspicion is that they been massaged to hide the massive inward migration into Punjab which would not look good for the governing Badal Dal & BJP coalition. The fact that these numbers were delayed by 4years indicates to me a political calculation was done to keep Sikh masses in a slumber about our numbers.

The wholesale proliferation of Balmiki and Dera Ballan apartheid mandirs in Majha and Malwa in this decade (particularly since the majority of those from the said so-called backgrounds were still Sikhs until 2011 is indicative of this gameplan being operated by our enemies). We do need to take the numbers seriously.

1. While Sikhs in India were shown as increasing only by 18% between 1991 and 2001, but the increase was uneven. In Punjab the Sikhs increased by only 14.3% (from 12.767M to 14.592M) but outside Punjab in the rest of India the Sikhs increased by 32.4%!! (3.492M to 4.623M).

= Agreed overall. But to a degree this may have to do with Sikhs returning to Delhi and other states after exile since 1984 as well as to a lesser extent Sikhs moving to a Union Territory like Chandigarh or indeed Panchkula or Ganganagar across from the Punjab borders.

So unless there was large scale migration of Sikhs from Punjab to other states of India then the figures do not look correct. As the period 1991-1995 was one of intense persecution of Sikhs it is unlikely that Sikhs would have been migrating from Punjab to other states.

= Agreed

2. In the 2011 census the Sikh population is shown as increasing by 9.67% in Punjab but outside Punjab the Sikh population is shown as increasing by only 4.45% !!

Personally Bhai Sahib that makes sense to me. As the non-Punjabi Sikhs are more urbanised and wealthier and thus with lower fertility levels.

Now the reason usually given for the fall in Sikh numbers in Punjab is migration and female foeticide. But does this mean that the Sikh population in states where the Sikh population increased by more than Punjab between 1991-2001 have suddenly started to have less children or started to commit female foeticide on a mass scale?

= I do believe it is down to these urban non-Punjab based Sikhs having lower fertility levels than rural Punjabi Sikhs.

3. The most surprising figures for Sikhs is that in states like Rajasthan where Sikhs had increased by percentages such as 26% between 1991-2001 have suddenly only increased by 6.6% between 2001-2011.

= I think that may have to do with Sikhs returning to Ganganagar district after 1995 (bearing in mind Sikhs are 1% plus of the population in Rajasthan a 26% swing would be easier to achieve with not that huge an amount of absolute numbers). Also agreed re much of the points you mentioned in relation to Delhi. In spite of that, given the massive influx into Delhi from all states swelling the population hugely and the impact of November 1984's Genocide, whichever way we cut it, Sikhs are less than half the Delhi percentage that we were back in 1984 currently.

The DSGMC needs to use it's resources and verify if the census data is correct or not because this data is used to allocate resources.

= Absolutely correct Bhai Sahib and this is why our opponents have a concrete agenda to deflate our numbers outside of Punjab as much as they can by defining sehajdhari non-Punjabi's as non-Sikhs but with respect to Punjab itself I honestly believe we are doing all their hard work for them. I am absolutely convinced that if we continue to ignore the proliferation of Balmiki and Dera Ballan apartheid mandir franchises in Majha and Malwa and let matrimonial apartheid and biraderi identification continue to fester then a 25% swing in the SC population (which is 32% of the overall Punjab total) would be enough to genuinely push us into minority status within Punjab by the 2021 census. I am absolutely sure our enemies are throwing everything and the kitchen sink at us to achieve this. Anyone who has been to Majha and Malwa recently will have witnessed this assault on the Sikh Panth. We have it within our power to stop our enemies if we want to and if we care about what Sikhi stands for.

All these Hindus need are enough numbers and in key positions (since they're able to vote) they will then exert power and remove 'Pro Sikhi' Panj Pyare and install their own 'Pro Hindu' Panj Pyare. It's that simple and that would be the beginning of the end. It will happen slowly but surely. In time, our Gurdwaras will resemble Mandirs.

= Q bro if you look at corporate companies there are different voting rights as commonplace. Certain companies allow shareholders to own shares (and thus be equal stakeholders) but nevertheless do not ascribe them identical voting rights. Clearly Amritdhari Sikhs would hold greater overall voting rights say in ensuring that a blanket one man one vote policy does not allow Hindutva puppets like Badal to re-introduce the practises of Hindu Mahants that the Singh Sabha Lehar bravely threw off via the qurbani of thousands of Sikhs in the 1920's. Look at Dubai and the UAE or Qatar as examples. The indigenous Arabs may indeed be a minority but their hold over power is absolute and they do not for a second fear that they will be made slaves in their own land or assimilated etc. Heck, even the Brahmins who were afraid of the shadows of so-called untouchables have realised the importance of opening up institutions like the RSS to greater membership (to serve their own interests) yet we are constantly harping on about being subsumed. Nobody can subsume the Sikhs! It's us who should be subsuming others since Sikhi is the Truth. If we don't welcome people into the Panth they are more than happy to stay in the bosom of Hindutva forces to our Panth's detriment.

You should.

= Much as I would like to take on the problems of the British, the Chinese and the Japanese they are far richer and successful and powerful than my own Qaum so I really can't spare my time for them. Besides, none of their governments give a damn about Sikhs in comparison to trade with Delhi.

If the impact is so negative why all the major inventions on this planet from the West ie alcohol drinkers?

= Do you really correlate intelligence with alcohol consumption? Do you really feel increased alcohol intake by Sikhs increases our Panth's intelligence levels? Why is Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaj quite clear that we should avoid alcohol - not that I'm stopping you on a personal level. There is an undeniable correlation between increased alcohol consumption and health problems.

Why is India so backward? I'm sorry but you have a skewed perception of reality.

= Because of the inherent stupidity of the lies fed to most Indians as so-called truths via Hinduism and Islam primarily.

Until people like you wake up from this stupidity ie believing that banning alcohol will suddenly magically create this 'renaissance' of Sikhism, we will never move forward.

= I have never advocated banning alcohol in Punjab where 43% of the people are non-Sikhs and when alcohol would be easy to be obtain across in Himachal, Haryana, Rajasthan etc. I do, however, strongly believe, that alcohol outlets should be restricted as much possible, that abstinence from alcohol should be promoted as much as possible and I do believe alcohol is an absolute cancer infecting our people and destroying hundreds of thousands of real lives. I do believe that music romanticising the intake of alcohol is a plague against our Qaum supported by anti-Sikh forces.

[Jonny101 4,384]

As always, excellent post by proactive jee

[Quantavius 141]

= Q bro if you look at corporate companies there are different voting rights as commonplace. Certain companies allow shareholders to own shares (and thus be equal stakeholders) but nevertheless do not ascribe them identical voting rights.

And you do realize that company/corporation bylaws can be changed and they're not written in stone? All I need is 51% share and I'll fire the current Board of Directors , hire my own Board of Directors and change all company by laws. It's that simple.

Clearly Amritdhari Sikhs would hold greater overall voting rights say in ensuring that a blanket one man one vote policy does not allow Hindutva puppets like Badal to re-introduce the practises of Hindu Mahants that the Singh Sabha Lehar bravely threw off via the qurbani of thousands of Sikhs in the 1920's.

These rules can be ignored, bent, broken or ultimately changed. All one needs are numbers. What happens when these 'pseudo Sikhs' outnumber true Sikhs by say more then 60% and start to exert power by demanding that voting be open up everybody and not just Amritdhari? What will you do then? This is quite a realistic scenario since you want to absorb enmasse a whole group of people who never really accepted Sikhism to begin with or the very least do not subscribe to your version of Sikhism.

You are not thinking things through.

Heck, even the Brahmins who were afraid of the shadows of so-called untouchables have realised the importance of opening up institutions like the RSS to greater membership (to serve their own interests) yet we are constantly harping on about being subsumed.

Poor comparison. Both untouchables and Brahmins are Hindus whereas 'pseudo Sikhs' were once Hindus and do not truly accept all of Sikhis's teachings.

Nobody can subsume the Sikhs! It's us who should be subsuming others since Sikhi is the Truth. If we don't welcome people into the Panth they are more than happy to stay in the bosom of Hindutva forces to our Panth's detriment.

Sorry but you're wrong.

.= Much as I would like to take on the problems of the British, the Chinese and the Japanese they are far richer and successful and powerful than my own Qaum so I really can't spare my time for them. Besides, none of their governments give a damn about Sikhs in comparison to trade with Delhi.

You should ask yourself, why are they richer despite indulging in alcohol? If alcohol is soooooooooooooo detrimental, should not these countries be living in squalor and poverty (like India)?

.= Do you really correlate intelligence with alcohol consumption? Do you really feel increased alcohol intake by Sikhs increases our Panth's intelligence levels? Why is Dhan Dhan Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji Maharaj quite clear that we should avoid alcohol - not that I'm stopping you on a personal level.

I'm trying to get you to discard this 'pendu' mentality. To the best of my knowledge Guruji Maharaj did not ask for it to be banned. Guruji Maharaj also made the hukam of 'wande ke shekao'. Is this being followed?

.There is an undeniable correlation between increased alcohol consumption and health problems.

Really? Why then are countries like Scotland and Japan one of the largest producers of hard liquor at least 200 years ahead of India? Going by your logic, they should produce a population of very sickly people and thus a nation that is poor and poverty stricken like those poor African nations. But that is simply not the case.

In fact, given a chance every single Indian would hop on a plane and live in these countries if given chance. Once again, 'pendu' mentality in play.

= I have never advocated banning alcohol in Punjab where 43% of the people are non-Sikhs and when alcohol would be easy to be obtain across in Himachal, Haryana, Rajasthan etc. I do, however, strongly believe, that alcohol outlets should be restricted as much possible, that abstinence from alcohol should be promoted as much as possible and I do believe alcohol is an absolute cancer infecting our people and destroying hundreds of thousands of real lives. I do believe that music romanticising the intake of alcohol is a plague against our Qaum supported by anti-Sikh forces.

Please explain why the top nations on this planet, US, UK, Germany, France, Japan, Korea, China....where alcohol flows freely dominates the world in terms, wealth, science, technology....pretty much every facet of life? Going by your logic, shouldn't they be a sickly people and thus be the poorest?

Please think things through before regurgitating the same old tired mantra over and over again.

[StarStriker 1,062]

Interesting posts veeriyo...

This thread can be linked with the thread below and the discussion can be expanded.

Have a look here! http://www.sikhsangat.com/index.php?/topic/77660-future-of-world-religions-and-what-we-can-learn-from-muslims/

WHY are u so obsessed with this sikh forum, despite being a muslim? Geezer ur reincarnating ur usernames....oh wait reincarnation doesnt exist does it?

[SheikhYoBooty 295]

Truly what a noble character the Prophet Muhammad was:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OTeAB4l0KCM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QNCz9MXmcsw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbD2BZZsMbY

TheReligionofPeace.com
Guide to Understanding Islam

What does the
Religion of Peace
Teach About...

The Sex Life of the Prophet

Question:

Was Islam's "perfect man" sexually restrained?

Summary Answer:

The Quran (which was narrated by Muhammad) refers to Muhammad's life as "as beautiful pattern of conduct for anyone whose hope is in Allah" (33:21) and "an exalted standard of character" (68:4). Yet, thanks to Allah's extraordinary interest in his personal sex life (as immortalized in the Quran) the prophet of Islam had sex with just about anyone he pleased.

Although the Qur'an didn't appear to have enough space for topics like universal love and brotherhood (which Muslims sometimes insist are there, but aren't), the list of sexual partners that Muhammad was entitled to is detailed more than once, sometimes in categories and sometimes in reference to specific persons (ie. Zaynab and Mary).

Muhammad was married to thirteen women, including eleven at one time. He relegated them to either consecutive days or (according to some accounts) all in one night. He had sex with a 9-year-old girl and married his adopted son's wife (after arranging a quick divorce). On top of that, Muhammad had a multitude of slave girls and concubines with whom he had sex - sometimes on the very days in which they had watched their husbands and fathers die at the hands of his army.

So, by any realistic measure, the creator of the world's most sexually restrictive religion was also one of the most sexually indulgent characters in history.

The Qur'an:

Allah managed to hand down quite a few "revelations" that sanctioned Muhammad's personal pursuit of sex to the doubters around him. Interestingly they have become part of the the eternal, infallible word of the Qur'an, to be memorized by generations of Muslims for whom they have no possible relevance.

Qur'an (33:37) - "But when Zaid had accomplished his want of her, We gave her to you as a wife, so that there should be no difficulty for the believers in respect of the wives of their adopted sons, when they have accomplished their want of them; and Allah's command shall be performed." No doubt millions of young Muslims, trying to outdo one another at memorizing the Qur'an, have wondered about what this verse means and why it is there. In fact, this is a "revelation" of convenience that Allah just happened to hand down at a time when Muhammad lusted after his daughter-in-law, Zaynab, - a state of affairs that disturbed local customs. The verse "commands" Muhammad to marry the woman (following her husband's gracious divorce). As for why this should be part of the eternal word of God...?

Qur'an (33:50) - "O Prophet! surely We have made lawful to you your wives whom you have given their dowries, and those whom your right hand possesses out of those whom Allah has given to you as prisoners of war, and the daughters of your paternal uncles and the daughters of your paternal aunts, and the daughters of your maternal uncles and the daughters of your maternal aunts who fled with you; and a believing woman if she gave herself to the Prophet, if the Prophet desired to marry her-- specially for you, not for the (rest of) believers; We know what We have ordained for them concerning their wives and those whom their right hands possess in order that no blame may attach to you; " This is another special command that Muhammad handed down to himself that allows virtually unlimited sex, divinely sanctioned by Allah. One assumes that this "revelation" was meant to assuage some sort of disgruntlement in the community over Muhammad's hedonism.

Qur'an (33:51) - "You may put off whom you please of them, and you may take to you whom you please, and whom you desire of those whom you had separated provisionally; no blame attaches to you; this is most proper, so that their eyes may be cool and they may not grieve, and that they should be pleased" This is in reference to a situation in which Muhammad's wives were grumbling about his preference for sleeping with a slave girl (Mary the Copt) instead of them. Accordingly, Muhammad may sleep with whichever wife (or slave) he wishes without having to hear the others complain... as revealed in Allah's literal and perfect words to more than a billion Muslims.

Qur'an (66:1-5) - "O Prophet! Why do you ban (for yourself) that which Allah has made lawful to you, seeking to please your wives?... Allah has already ordained for you, the dissolution of your oaths " Another remarkably personal passage of sexual convenience in a book billed as Allah's perfect and eternal message to mankind. Muhammad was caught sleeping with a slave woman on the night that he was supposed to be with one of his wives. Initially promising to be faithful, "Allah" tells his prophet to break that promise and enjoy sex with his slaves. If his wives objected then "it may be if he divorced you (all) that his Lord will give him instead of you, wives better than you."

Qur'an (4:24) - "And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess." Allah even permitted Muhammad and his men to have sex with married slaves, such as those captured in battle.

From the Hadith:

Muslim (8:3309) - Muhammad consummated his marriage to Aisha when she was only nine. (See also Bukhari 58:234 and many other places). No where in the reliable Hadith or Sira is there any other age given. Other references are Sahih Bukhari 3896, 5158 and 3311.

Bukhari (62:18) - Aisha's father, Abu Bakr, wasn't on board at first, but Muhammad explained how the rules of their religion made it possible. This is similar to the way that present-day cult leaders manipulate their followers into similar concessions.

Muslim (8:3311) - The girl took her dolls with her to Muhammad's house (something to play with when the "prophet" was not having sex with her).

Bukhari (6:298) - Muhammad would take a bath with the little girl and fondle her.

Muslim (8:3460) - "Why didn't you marry a young girl so that you could sport with her and she sport with you, or you could amuse with her and she could amuse with you?" Muhammad posed this question to one of his followers who had married an "older woman" instead of opting to fondle a child.

Bukhari (4:232) - Muhammad's wives would wash semen stains out of his clothes, which were still wet from the spot-cleaning even when he went to the mosque for prayers. Between copulation and prayer, it's a wonder he found the time to slay pagans.

Bukhari (6:300) - Muhammad's wives had to be available for the prophet's fondling even when they were having their menstrual period.

Bukhari (93:639) - The Prophet of Islam would recite the 'Holy Qur'an' with his head in Aisha's lap, when she was menstruating.

Bukhari (62:6) - "The Prophet used to go round (have sexual relations with) all his wives in one night, and he had nine wives." Muhammad also said that it was impossible to treat all wives equally - and it isn't hard to guess why.

Bukhari (5:268) - "The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number." I asked Anas, 'Had the Prophet the strength for it?' Anas replied, 'We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty men.' "

Bukhari (60:311) - "I feel that your Lord hastens in fulfilling your wishes and desires." These words were spoken by Aisha within the context of her husband having been given 'Allah's permission' to fulfill his sexual desires with a large number of women in whatever order he chooses. (It has been suggested that Aisha may have been speaking somewhat wryly).

Muslim (8:3424) - One of several narrations in which a leering Muhammad orders a clearly startled woman to suckle a grown man with her breast so that he will become "unlawful" to her - meaning that they can live under the same roof together.

Tabari IX:137 - "Allah granted Rayhana of the Qurayza to Muhammad as booty." Muhammad considered the women that he captured and enslaved to be God's gift to him.

Tabari VIII:117 - "Dihyah had asked the Messenger for Safiyah when the Prophet chose her for himself... the Apostle traded for Safiyah by giving Dihyah her two cousins. The women of Khaybar were distributed among the Muslims." He sometimes pulled rank to reserve the most beautiful captured women for himself.

Tabari IX:139 - "You are a self-respecting girl, but the prophet is a womanizer." Words spoken by the disappointed parents of a girl who had 'offered' herself to Muhammad (he accepted).

Additional Notes:

Muhammad's sexual antics are an embarrassment to those Muslims who are aware of them. This is particularly so for their prophet's consummation of his marriage to Aisha when she was only nine years of age. The thought of a 54-year-old man called Muhammad sleeping and bathing with a young girl is intensely unpleasant and it reflects the disgusting character of a sexual glutton rather than a holy man. Critics even allege that Muhammad was a pedophile.

[CanadianSingh 47]

Shiek please stop bringing your Musilman crap here! You Kutha <banned word filter activated> get out of here! You people are such pests, when I go to forums, I look for good answers, and one of you crazy idiots keep spreading your musliman crap everywhere!