So what if you're protecting us and shedding your young blood for us, you're just one skidmark created for protection of our existence

[Guest]

LOOK AT the comment of this <banned word filter activated>. 

Someone needs to get off their high horse.

Moral of the story  : You can die for them , but they won't even acknowledge your existence and identity , forget about expecting something else. I am feeling angry now 

 

 

 

 

 

[ChardikalaUK]

Nothing new there. Hindus also claim Buddhism is also a sect of Hinduism.

They have a trick which I've noticed, whenever a popular religious leader like Guru Nanak or Buddha is born they call him an avatar of Vishnu and then claim him as one of their own.

Another claim they make which I hate is that Sikhism was created to protect Hindus from muslims. Are we some kind of security firm?

[Guest]

11 minutes ago, ChardikalaUK said:

Nothing new there. Hindus also claim Buddhism is also a sect of Hinduism.

They have a trick which I've noticed, whenever a popular religious leader like Guru Nanak or Buddha is born they call him an avatar of Vishnu and then claim him as one of their own.

Another claim they make which I hate is that Sikhism was created to protect Hindus from muslims. Are we some kind of security firm?

did u see her comment. boils my blood. 

If Sikhs worked so hard and made so many sacrifices for their own cause than for the hindu masters, we would have  progressed so much 

[ChardikalaUK]

12 minutes ago, AjeetSingh2019 said:

did u see her comment. boils my blood. 

If Sikhs worked so hard and made so many sacrifices for their own cause than for the hindu masters, we would have  progressed so much 

Yes it's annoying.

However whether we like it or not, there is a link between Sikhi and Hinduism in India, a lot of Punjabi Hindus did make their eldest son a Sikh, how do you feel about that? Would you have preferred if they never did that?

[proactive]

The Protectors of Hinduism concept promoted by most Hindus is a very clear and devious way in which Hindus can-;

1. Negate our independent status. Our past, present and future is thus tied to the Hindus.

2. Brainwash every new Sikh generation into thinking that our present status as the canon fodder of the Hindus is what our Gurus envisaged for us. This is why the slogan "Raj Karega Khalsa" irks Hindus no end as it smashes the above concept in one go.

3. If you take the protectors of Hindus concept to its logical conclusion then what if tomorrow the Hindus state that they are now so powerful that they do no need the Khalsa to defend them. Does that not mean the Khalsa then needs to 'merge' back into the Hindus? 

There is a story told that just after partition when the Hindu leadership of Punjab had selected Master Tara Singh and the Sikhs to take lead against the Pakistan demand, some Hindu leaders invited the brother of Master Tara Singh, I think his name was Narain Singh who was more of a Indian nationalist than Master Tara Singh, to publicly cut his hair and take of all the kakaars because now that the Hindus were ruling their own country then there was no reason for the Khalsa to exist! He was shocked and from then on understood what the Hindu leadership had in store for the Sikhs in 'free' India. 

 

[proactive]

 

17 minutes ago, ChardikalaUK said:

Yes it's annoying.

However whether we like it or not, there is a link between Sikhi and Hinduism in India, a lot of Punjabi Hindus did make their eldest son a Sikh, how do you feel about that? Would you have preferred if they never did that?

This tradition took place in one small part of Punjab called Pothohar and was never a widespread tradition among all the Hindus of Punjab. Khushwant Singh who came from that area and who wrote his two volume History of the Sikhs used to refer to this but without giving the background of this tradition or admitting that it was only from the Pothohar area. If it was a Punjab wide tradition then within 5-6 generations the Sikhs would have managed to merge the Hindus into Sikhism. This tradition started when Hindu women who did not have a male son would make a 'sukhiya' or vow at either a Sikh Baba's dera or at a Sikh shrine like Panja Sahib that if their next child was a male then they would raise that son as a Sikh. If a son was born then he would be a raised a Sikh but if other sons and daughters were born after that then they would all be raised as Hindus. You can see that the 'sukhiya' was just a religious vow which the Hindus kept but it was devoid of any true commitment to Sikhism because if they had true commitment to Sikhism then all the following children would have been raised as Sikhs. 

The obscure tradition was constantly used by the Indian media in the 80s and 90s to show that Sikhs and Hindus were from the same family and that their's was a Nau-Maas da Rishta. 

[Guest]

There's a saying in punjabi "Sharika mitti da vi bura hunda hai" (cousin, even if made of dirt, is very dangerous)

Look all over history. Pandavs and Kauravs of mahabharat who fought each other were cousins. Japanese did one of the biggest genocides on Chinese, even though both related. Russia and europeans , both whites, still despise each other.

jews and muslims are cousins from same family line of abraham, but bay for each other's blood.

In same vein, yes, sikhism and hinduism are related, no doubt, we share certain philosophies and beliefs and customs, but still .... rest is history as u know !  

[Ranjeet01]

The Hindu mindset is like a tangled web, it can only 3 or 4 contradictions all at once and it will not see anything wrong with it.

They can rationalise it away. 

According to hindus:

We are the sword arm of hindus and we are created to protect them yet at the same time they want to get rid of us if it does not suit their purpose. 

The Hindu mindset is like a woman in many ways. It is quite fickle, manipulatuve, emotionally erratic and has a sense of entitlement.

 

[MisterrSingh]

I'll repeat what I said a while ago: we'd have been better served at the inception of Sikhi if all links to Hinduism were disavowed much like how Islam drew a line underneath its links to Judaism and Christianity. But, if that was never meant to be the divine plan by the founders, considering how our iconographic lexicon is inextricably Hindu-based, what exactly was the point of it all? We can swear until we're blue in the face that we reject the Hindu pantheon, but for an apparently distinct entity, we sure seem to refer to it and draw our underlying philosophical basis from its existence on an inconveniently intimate basis. To be truly separate from Hinduism we would have to erase ALL Vedantic influences, but then what remains of the religion aside from surface practices?

For me, it all comes to back to geography. If only we had some physical breathing space from the overwhelming non-Sikh influences that bleed into our reality, we might have been able to forge ahead with a clear vision. Now, we're just surrounded on all sides.

[dallysingh101]

5 minutes ago, MisterrSingh said:

I'll repeat what I said a while ago: we'd have been better served at the inception of Sikhi if all links to Hinduism were disavowed much like how Islam drew a line underneath its links to Judaism and Christianity.

Hasn't this pretty much been tried with the Singh Sabha thing? That didn't resolve our issues though.

Quote

But, if that was never meant to be the divine plan by the founders, considering how our iconographic lexicon is inextricably Hindu-based, what exactly was the point of it all? We can swear until we're blue in the face that we reject the Hindu pantheon, but for an apparently distinct entity, we sure seem to refer to it and draw our underlying philosophical basis from its existence on an inconveniently intimate basis. To be truly separate from Hinduism we would have to erase ALL Vedantic influences, but then what remains of the religion aside from surface practices?

Well, once we start engaging with Dasam Bani we can see that our Guru ji never hesitated to employ Indic (or even other) narratives to fit our own purpose. 

I've said it before, the real divergence between Sikhi and 'Hinduism' is in the egalitarian, militaristic social structure as exemplified with the Khalsa. But those of us keeping it real know we've foisted some outside biraderi system (and a new type of casteism) on the panth - so we don't actually practice what it is that makes our society different from the Hindu one. That's our own fault.  

 

Quote

For me, it all comes to back to geography. If only we had some physical breathing space from the overwhelming non-Sikh influences that bleed into our reality, we might have been able to forge ahead with a clear vision. Now, we're just surrounded on all sides.

Given what I've written above, I think we are pretty much capable of distorting our thing with our own baggage, let alone outsiders getting their oar in.  If that is the case, we'd be likely to screw up our society with this mentality even in our own vacuum. Not that having our own space is a bad thing - but we need to right mentality to go with it too - not people deviously trying to push odious caste agendas in.