The Path to a Sikh Renaissance

[Guest Jacfsing2]

10 hours ago, TejS said:

Well, I think its impossible for us to secure a Khalistan in the current predicament that our community is in.We are too scattered, not only in terms of Sikhi, but also in terms of education, and thats why I think it would be wiser to focus our energy from Khalistan to education. Education is the one thing that can propel the Sikh community forward, and its the only thing we aren't focusing on. And by education I mean something that is going to make an uplift on our global identity as well as the basics such as every Sikh knowing Gurmukhi. I'm talking about striving to get to the upper echelons of professional degrees as well as having a learned person in every Sikh household. With education, Brahmanic influences can be removed from Sikhi, this is very evident in the Western world, where educated Sikh Americans do not confrom to pointless Punjabi superstitions, and instead ONLY follow what is written in the GGS. Take for example my extended family living in India. They are "Sikhs" but go and offer donations to some Hanuman temple, which is quite ironic. The reason they do this is because that's what the elders have passed down, who too were uneducated. Had any of my extended family members ever read the GGS cover to cover, they would know this practice is pointless, and would ultimately educate the remaining family members. Education is a NEED for our community, if we hope to survive.

Punjab already has some great institutions like IIM Amritsar, Punjab University, Chandigarh, IIT Ropar and etc., however if you check the current students page, its usually a majority of Hindus, and not only Punjabi Hindus, but Hindus from all over India - this is very depressing to see. You can say there is bias and favoritism, however with good merit and marks, you're bound to get in somewhere worthwhile, however most Sikhs don't excel in studies. And why limit ourselves to Punjab, apply to universities in Delhi, Mumbai or heck even the Western world (nothing better than this), why not strive for the Ivy Leagues, Oxbridge, Canadian/AU/NZ unis. Don't limit ourselves to just Punjab Sikh-centered institutions, spread out and become Deans and members of Faculty at reputable unis like in America and help fellow Sikhs get in by creating networks (that's how the Jewish people do it, and clearly its working for them, so why not us).

In terms of removing the warrior mentality, what I am trying to say is that we are too often thinking like warriors. If there is any issue, we're all immediately ready to raise our swords and get physical. When in fact we need to instead remain calm, and think strategically, before acting like warriors. I think we should preserve the warrior spirit within us instead, which is exactly what you described: being brave, independent and to add on, standing up for what's right. However, too many times we act like warriors without thinking clearly, and end up getting damaged more than we can sustain- post 1984 is a prime example of this. I'm not saying be cowards, all I'm saying is we need to be calm, collected and should make wise decisions that will be more effective than getting hyper at the drop of every issue.

Just my personal thoughts, let me know what you think.

I do think that you are thinking ideally, most people won't listen to our demands simply by being more educated. They need to see Sikhs as a force that has power, if you compare Israel to Punjab, they have nuclear weapons and can force their will more openly in their area, in India today, many Sikhs have been brainwashed by the Indian government. Sikhs in the diaspora, are in general more educated than their Indian counterparts; however, even then, nobody listens to our demands that we put for them as Sikhs, and every time we offer suggestions to help out our Sikhs, the media starts speaking s*hit

[TejS]

17 hours ago, Jacfsing2 said:

I do think that you are thinking ideally, most people won't listen to our demands simply by being more educated. They need to see Sikhs as a force that has power, if you compare Israel to Punjab, they have nuclear weapons and can force their will more openly in their area, in India today, many Sikhs have been brainwashed by the Indian government. Sikhs in the diaspora, are in general more educated than their Indian counterparts; however, even then, nobody listens to our demands that we put for them as Sikhs, and every time we offer suggestions to help out our Sikhs, the media starts speaking s*hit

Perhaps I am being idealistic, however what I'm trying to get at is that if we become educated, it'll allow for a far more percentage of successful, perhaps even powerful Sikhs. Those Sikhs, especially the ones in the West, can then lobby together and provide sufficient funds for "proper parcharik" - like Jugraj Singh, and can catalyze the true understanding of Sikhi within our community, removing Brahmanical/Hindu influence or as you called  it 'brainwash', thus severing the superficial Sikh-Hindu relationship that many Sikhs immensely believe in. I could be wrong, and this could backfire, but its better than nothing, right? Imagine sending a Jugraj Singh to every village/city in Punjab, surely through strife, people will eventually get the message.

I also think we don't need nuclear powers to gain a homeland, although protecting it is of course a different story. I think if we can amass a significant group of affluent, educated Sikhs working for the Panth, that can exert power, it will go a long way in ensuring that our needs are heard and that our demands are met. Anyways, like I said earlier, our focus should not be on securing a homeland right now. It should be on returning our people back on to the path of Sikhi, spreading Sikhism to those interested, increasing our numbers through all means justifiable, and producing capable Sikh youth that will contribute positively and significantly to the world - this will eventually (perhaps a 100 years from now) lead to a homeland, but it will also cement Sikhs as a force of power.

[Koi]

Whilst I like the OPs list, I would like to categorically say that we should NEVER, EVER shed the warrior mentality, ever.

[TejS]

17 hours ago, Koi said:

Whilst I like the OPs list, I would like to categorically say that we should NEVER, EVER shed the warrior mentality, ever.

By mentality what I meant was that we shouldn't always be thinking like we're warriors, and be prepared to engage in all-out war. What I meant is that we need to think more, be more calculative in our actions and decisions, especially ones about communal interests.

But your comment, as well ones posted by other users echoing the same thought as you, has got me thinking that the only reason that Sikhi has survived, and that you or I exist today is due to the warrior spirit of our ancestors, meaning they didn't back down even in the face of adversity and against unfavorable odds. So I've made a change to the list, mentioning that we must uphold a warrior spirit of bravery and courage, but also think about where to apply that spirit i.e. for example all those Sikh jawans laying their lives down for India or our people standing up for Hindu/Muslim issue is pointless imo. 

[Sukhvirk1976]

On 25/08/2017 at 10:03 PM, TejS said:

Perhaps I am being idealistic, however what I'm trying to get at is that if we become educated, it'll allow for a far more percentage of successful, perhaps even powerful Sikhs. Those Sikhs, especially the ones in the West, can then lobby together and provide sufficient funds for "proper parcharik" - like Jugraj Singh, and can catalyze the true understanding of Sikhi within our community, removing Brahmanical/Hindu influence or as you called  it 'brainwash', thus severing the superficial Sikh-Hindu relationship that many Sikhs immensely believe in. I could be wrong, and this could backfire, but its better than nothing, right? Imagine sending a Jugraj Singh to every village/city in Punjab, surely through strife, people will eventually get the message.

I also think we don't need nuclear powers to gain a homeland, although protecting it is of course a different story. I think if we can amass a significant group of affluent, educated Sikhs working for the Panth, that can exert power, it will go a long way in ensuring that our needs are heard and that our demands are met. Anyways, like I said earlier, our focus should not be on securing a homeland right now. It should be on returning our people back on to the path of Sikhi, spreading Sikhism to those interested, increasing our numbers through all means justifiable, and producing capable Sikh youth that will contribute positively and significantly to the world - this will eventually (perhaps a 100 years from now) lead to a homeland, but it will also cement Sikhs as a force of power.

I'm not sure adopting evangelism and defining good parchaariks as jugraj Singh or anyone for  that matter  as being a positive 

[TejS]

On 8/26/2017 at 6:45 PM, Sukhvirk1976 said:

I'm not sure adopting evangelism and defining good parchaariks as jugraj Singh or anyone for  that matter  as being a positive 

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to disagree with you here.

Firstly, using the world evangelism for what I stated is clearly wrong. I'm not saying send people to war-torn Syria and capitalize on their situation by handing them the GGS and telling them to accept Sikhi, or go door-to-door telling people to convert because Guru Nanak was the son of God. What I'm saying is that most people that currently identify as Sikhs, or those as Sikh-Hindu, don't follow what's written in the GGS due to ignorance and lack of knowledge, that's why you have people doing Sikh prayer and then taking part in Brahmanical practices such as discrimination of certain castes. I'm saying that a capable parcharik who is well versed and who understands the basics of GGS be sent to villages/cities to clear misconceptions, not coax non-Sikhs into Sikhism. I'm thinking more in line with religious educator rather than evangelist. 

Secondly, I think Jugraj Singh was an exceptional parcharik who cleared out many doubts regarding Sikhi not only for myself but many others. He was far better than your average parcharik who teaches Sikhi laced with Hindu superstitions. 

[Sukhvirk1976]

On 27/08/2017 at 5:10 PM, TejS said:

I'm sorry but I'm going to have to disagree with you here.

Firstly, using the world evangelism for what I stated is clearly wrong. I'm not saying send people to war-torn Syria and capitalize on their situation by handing them the GGS and telling them to accept Sikhi, or go door-to-door telling people to convert because Guru Nanak was the son of God. What I'm saying is that most people that currently identify as Sikhs, or those as Sikh-Hindu, don't follow what's written in the GGS due to ignorance and lack of knowledge, that's why you have people doing Sikh prayer and then taking part in Brahmanical practices such as discrimination of certain castes. I'm saying that a capable parcharik who is well versed and who understands the basics of GGS be sent to villages/cities to clear misconceptions, not coax non-Sikhs into Sikhism. I'm thinking more in line with religious educator rather than evangelist. 

Secondly, I think Jugraj Singh was an exceptional parcharik who cleared out many doubts regarding Sikhi not only for myself but many others. He was far better than your average parcharik who teaches Sikhi laced with Hindu superstitions. 

I feel what your saying brother!  before continuing with my response, I would just like to say I think that the spirit and nature  of your reply is exactly  in keeping with the type conducive, open,  honest and constructive conversations we should be having on this forum. Instead of belittling people, trashing them we should be able to provide considered rational responses. 

 my characterisation of 'evangelism' was used in the wider sense.. If we as a community in whatever manner say we know better than others then that is evangelism.. It is a behaviour born of ahankar. 

Secondly, by saying that we need more parchaariks like jugraj Singh who you in your words is good because of xyz.. It means you have a predisposition to what he is saying revealing ones own political position. 

Traditionally parchaariks of a high calibre would be able to speak and communicate bani in a sophisticated manner where they don't measure or criticise broad groups they as the Guru's did would challenge behaviour or institutional structures and not write off a whole group of people.. 

All love brother,

 humbly 

SSA

[TejS]

On 8/28/2017 at 10:28 PM, Sukhvirk1976 said:

I feel what your saying brother!  before continuing with my response, I would just like to say I think that the spirit and nature  of your reply is exactly  in keeping with the type conducive, open,  honest and constructive conversations we should be having on this forum. Instead of belittling people, trashing them we should be able to provide considered rational responses. 

 my characterisation of 'evangelism' was used in the wider sense.. If we as a community in whatever manner say we know better than others then that is evangelism.. It is a behaviour born of ahankar. 

Secondly, by saying that we need more parchaariks like jugraj Singh who you in your words is good because of xyz.. It means you have a predisposition to what he is saying revealing ones own political position. 

Traditionally parchaariks of a high calibre would be able to speak and communicate bani in a sophisticated manner where they don't measure or criticise broad groups they as the Guru's did would challenge behaviour or institutional structures and not write off a whole group of people.. 

All love brother,

 humbly 

SSA

Likewise, your responses to my posts have encouraged great conversation, and have even challenged me in the sense that I've had to organize my wandering thoughts about Sikhi, and deliberately debate over my own beliefs in order to clearly respond to you. 

Now, in response to your claim that sending out parchariks to educate others would be a sign of hankar, I disagree with this. I think it would be egotistical of us to assume that we know better than others, but in this instance, we aren't assuming that, we are instead seeing the result of lack of Sikh knowledge, in the form of deras and Sikh youth being absorbed by drugs. To assume that I am very knowledgeable, and that you are not so much, would be egotistical of me. To see that you are struggling with something of which I can offer assistance, is not egotistical, but being helpful and productive. Having pride in one's knowledge gained is hankar, using that knowledge to help others, is teaching. A parcharik is simply one that educates and clears doubts, like a teacher. And so if teaching the illiterate or unlearned is considered hankar, then how would any learning be ever achieved. And if the ones that are confused regarding Sikhi, assume that they know what's right, then is that not hankar either. By teaching from the GGS, the parchariks will simply be expelling doubts that the general population has regarding Sikhi, and it doesn't even have to be on the assumption that others are confused, but simply a routinely recital of the GGS and its colloquial meaning to serve as a reminder to Waheguru. 

Coming to your second point, I can agree that Jugraj Singh was not a parcharik that would be able to cater to all demographics, but do we really need a parcharik that can? If a certain parcharik caters to all demographics, will he/she not be spreading themselves out too thin, and how will they cater to the nuances of each demographic. Because interest is extremely important to hook the general population to parchariks, and if the interests of a certain group of people are not being catered to, then no connect will form between them and the parcharik. And lastly, I think it would be egotistical of any parcharik or person to think that they can emulate the knowledge, and caliber of the Gurus, and thus I don't think we'll be seeing such a parcharik as the one you described, ever.

All love to you as well my brother, and let me know what you think.

[Sukhvirk1976]

14 hours ago, TejS said:

Likewise, your responses to my posts have encouraged great conversation, and have even challenged me in the sense that I've had to organize my wandering thoughts about Sikhi, and deliberately debate over my own beliefs in order to clearly respond to you. 

Now, in response to your claim that sending out parchariks to educate others would be a sign of hankar, I disagree with this. I think it would be egotistical of us to assume that we know better than others, but in this instance, we aren't assuming that, we are instead seeing the result of lack of Sikh knowledge, in the form of deras and Sikh youth being absorbed by drugs. To assume that I am very knowledgeable, and that you are not so much, would be egotistical of me. To see that you are struggling with something, of which I can offer assistance, is not egotistical, but being helpful and productive. Having pride in one's knowledge gained is hankar, using that knowledge to help others, is teaching. A parcharik is simply one that educates and clears doubts, like a teacher. And so if teaching the illiterate or unlearned is considered hankar, then how would any learning be ever achieved. And if the ones that are confused regarding Sikhi, assume that they know what's right, then is that not hankar either. By teaching from the GGS, the parchariks will simply be expelling doubts that the general population has regarding Sikhi, and it doesn't even have to be on the assumption that others are confused, but simply a routinely recital of the GGS and its colloquial meaning to serve as a reminder to Waheguru. 

Coming to your second point, I can agree that Jugraj Singh was not a parcharik that would be able to cater to all demographics, but do we really need a parcharik that can? If a certain parcharik caters to all demographics, will he/she not be spreading themselves out too thin, and how will they cater to the nuances of each demographic. Because interest is extremely important to hook the general population to parchariks, and if the interests of a certain group of people are not being catered to, then no connect will form between them and the parcharik. And lastly, I think it would be egotistical of any parcharik or person to think that they can emulate the knowledge, and caliber of the Gurus, and thus I don't think we'll be seeing such a parcharik as the one you described, ever.

All love to you as well my brother, and let me know what you think.

Thank you for your considered response.. 

I totally agree with you that we need parchaar to help people understand bani and sikhi.. However it is the way you do parchaar that is important.. Traditionally parchaariks wouldn't be dogmatic.. For me the best parchaar out there at the moment is khalsa aid or Nanak naam.. Khalsa aid through their behaviour express the very essence of sikhi.. Nanak naam provide a breakdown of bani without offering a singular homogeneous dogmatic answer.. Rather they as in keeping with Sikh traditions they highlight the message, the composite parts, linguistic poetic providing a number of starting points for the listeners personal 'khoj' 

Parchaariks shouldn't target demographics, else they would be only preaching to the converted.. Or rather playing on a demographics proclivities.. Sikhi is a universal message, and hence when proper parchaar is done it's none exclusive equally challenging to the new and the old... If we have parchaariks who claim to definitely interpret bani it means they themselves believe they have learned everything.. Something even our Gurus never did.. 

There is a fine line between parchaar and evangelism and BOS in my humble opinion veer towards the latter.. Part of a wider political movement...which in my own opinion is further illustrated by the wider political programme of Sikh press association, the new political party, and the umbrella group everything 13.. I just think we could be sleep walking into a cultural environment that whilst has the best intentions will ultimately undermine the very principles of sikhi 

 

One love brother 

SSA 

[TejS]

On 9/1/2017 at 4:42 PM, Sukhvirk1976 said:

Thank you for your considered response.. 

I totally agree with you that we need parchaar to help people understand bani and sikhi.. However it is the way you do parchaar that is important.. Traditionally parchaariks wouldn't be dogmatic.. For me the best parchaar out there at the moment is khalsa aid or Nanak naam.. Khalsa aid through their behaviour express the very essence of sikhi.. Nanak naam provide a breakdown of bani without offering a singular homogeneous dogmatic answer.. Rather they as in keeping with Sikh traditions they highlight the message, the composite parts, linguistic poetic providing a number of starting points for the listeners personal 'khoj' 

Parchaariks shouldn't target demographics, else they would be only preaching to the converted.. Or rather playing on a demographics proclivities.. Sikhi is a universal message, and hence when proper parchaar is done it's none exclusive equally challenging to the new and the old... If we have parchaariks who claim to definitely interpret bani it means they themselves believe they have learned everything.. Something even our Gurus never did.. 

There is a fine line between parchaar and evangelism and BOS in my humble opinion veer towards the latter.. Part of a wider political movement...which in my own opinion is further illustrated by the wider political programme of Sikh press association, the new political party, and the umbrella group everything 13.. I just think we could be sleep walking into a cultural environment that whilst has the best intentions will ultimately undermine the very principles of sikhi 

 

One love brother 

SSA 

Apologies for the delay in responding, however as I was unaware of Nanak Naam, I've been spending the past few days reading about their mission and watching their content, and I feel that I know enough about them that I can now respond.

I can see where you're coming from and I agree that the kind of "parchaar" that Khalsa Aid/Nanak Naam does is universal, and is unparalleled due to their practicing nature, rather than just preaching. These kind of initiatives are representative of true Sikhi in practice, and are great for the unaware to become acquainted with Sikhi. However, there are certain issues that our community is currently grappling with, such as Hindu influenced practices, and to rid those we need to apply a far more aggressive, calculated and dogmatic approach - which I personally see nothing wrong with. Remember, religion is dogmatic itself, otherwise you would not have Sikhs, Hindus, Muslims. I think intrinsically humans are attracted towards dogma for a reason, we need them to have an identity and feel defined. And so I think that in order to pull our pseudo-Sikh people away from Brahmanical practices, the Sikh dogma outlined in the GGS will need to be aggressively upheld, and demographics will need to be kept in mind. This is the only way that we can separate ourselves from Hindus practices - which have fragmented our community to the point of despair (casteism leads to hatred/dislike/prejudice among Sikhs, which then fuels sirsa deras and fake babas like gurmeet ram rahim, who in turn manipulate/exploit those prejudiced Sikhs).