Talk:Sikhism: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively ← Previous editContent deleted Content addedVisual WikitextInline

Revision as of 22:47, 14 July 2006 editHaphar (talk \| contribs)10,958 edits Add me← Previous edit		Latest revision as of 14:17, 8 December 2024 edit undoRegentsPark (talk \| contribs)Autopatrolled, Administrators45,689 editsm Reverted edit by 116.71.14.36 (talk) to last version by CewbotTag: Rollback
Line 1:		Line 1:
			{{Contentious topics/talk notice\|topic=ipa}}{{Talk header\|search=yes}}
	{{featured}}
	{{Indian ~~selected~~}}		{{Indian English}}
			{{Article history\|collapsed=yes
	{{oldpeerreview}}
			\|action1=PR
	{{0.5 nom}}
			\|action1date=20:51, 16 June 2006
	{{todo}}
			\|action1link=Misplaced Pages:Peer review/Sikhism/archive1
			\|action1result=reviewed
			\|action1oldid=59002224

			\|action2=FAC
	<!--Template:Archivebox begins-->
			\|action2date=16:21, 2 July 2006
	{\| class="infobox" width="315px"
			\|action2link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Sikhism
	\|-
			\|action2result=promoted
	! align="center" \| ]<br />]
			\|action2oldid=61696247
	----
	\|-
	\|
	# ]
	# ]
	# ]
	#
	\|}<!--Template:Archivebox ends-->

			\|action3=FAR
	== Sikhism is a featured article ==
			\|action3date=01:28, 17 August 2009
			\|action3link=Misplaced Pages:Featured article review/Sikhism/archive1
			\|action3result=removed
			\|action3oldid=306965394

			\|maindate=August 17, 2006
	Well done everyone. Sikhism is now a featured article on the English Misplaced Pages! Now I'm trying to get it on the ]. ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 23:36, 4 July 2006 (UTC)
			\|currentstatus=FFA
	:Congrats to all those who worked on this! -- ] <sup>\] \]</sup> 07:26, 5 July 2006 (UTC)
			}}
			{{WikiProject banner shell\|class=B\|vital=yes\|1=
			{{WikiProject India\|importance=top\|punjab=yes\|punjab-importance=top\|portal=yes}}
			{{WikiProject Pakistan\|importance=low}}
			{{WikiProject Religion\|importance=Top}}
			{{WikiProject Sikhism}}
			}}
			{{To do\|collapsed=yes}}
			{{pp-move-indef}}

			{{Spoken Misplaced Pages request\|Sikhism\|Please make 'Sikhism' an audio recording because it is one of the world's major religions, and making it a recording would allow adherents who are visually impaired the ability to hear about the tenets of their faith and the issues that effect Sikhs}}
	:Congrats indeed ! ] 00:09, 8 July 2006 (UTC)
			{{User:MiszaBot/config
			\|archive = Talk:Sikhism/Archive %(counter)d
			\|algo = old(90d)
			\|counter = 6
			\|maxarchivesize = 250K
			\|minthreadsleft = 5
			\|minthreadstoarchive = 1
			\|archiveheader = {{aan}}
			}}

			== Ridiculous claims of 120 million Sikhs with spurious sources ==
	== Sindhis and Sikhism ==
			Removing these. Unreferenced news articles are not adequate sources for this claim <!-- Template:Unsigned --><small class="autosigned">— Preceding ] comment added by ] (] • ]) 21:28, September 20, 2021 (UTC)</small>

			== Inaccurate edits made by User without sources to back it ==
	Does anyone have any information on Sindhis and Sikhism? I've been reading how a large portion of the Hindu Sindhi population revered Guru Nanak and how Sikhism was quite prominent in the Sindh prior to partition. Any further expansion on this could be good for the article. ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 23:32, 6 July 2006 (UTC)
			This ] has made an this edit alongside a few others all of a sudden since last week. Which is strange as this did not happen for over 6 months since the info box was created. One of those users who made an edit was ] who was also banned for being sockpuppet ( Just to reiterate I am not saying Joshua or others are related parties of Mattansilk). Also to note they have made these edits with NO sources and constantly reverting them

			I have no issue with it being referred to as a Dharmic faith. As we share some similar core values and beliefs and should maintain unity with each other.
	Oh, and here is an interesting article relating to Sikhism and Hinduism. Now this is sourced, so it could be a good way to begin to find information for a paragraph in the article: . ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 23:40, 6 July 2006 (UTC)

			So the two issues i want to address was:
	== No section on Sikhism & Hinduism as one? ==
			1) Slogan: This user along with the other users who made the same edits are finding it hard to differentiate between a Sikh jakhaira/Slogan (Bole So Nihal, Sat Sri Akal) and Sikh greeting (Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Fateh). As per ] it clearly states this is the Sikh Slogan as well. https://www.discoversikhism.com/sikhism/bole_so_nihal_sat_sri_akal.html

			2) Sikhism did not separate from Hinduism or any other religion. Sikhs themselves view Guru Nanak was Sikh from birth as the Gurus are a reflection of God. There are many instances of Guru Nanak rejected Hindu practices from at a young age such as sacred thread, caste system etc...
	Im trying to understand something....THeir are many people in the past up til even today who dont believe that the Gurus were trying to seperate Indians into a HIndu & Sikh catagory...Meaning that HIndus and Sikhs are supposed to be united as ONE...NOw u people obviously dont agree...and thats your opinion...But why wont u allow for a one sentence link to the article that argues about what im saying....Its just one sentence....thats all it is....Their should be a link for those who are interested in learning about this....and one more thing.....Please do not respond to this message and say to me that the reason you are not allowing it is because I do not provide evidence...I mean I have been putting tons & tons of evidence for a few weeks now....and even if i didnt....WHICH I DID....But even if i didnt...ALl the evidence is on the page that I am talking about! The page that I am arguing for has all the evidence....So new excuse do u people have now? ] 00:12, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

			I.e He rejected the sacred Hindu thread as a young boy. Furthermore in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib he states "ਹਜ ਕਾਬੈ ਜਾਉ ਨ ਤੀਰਥ ਪੂਜਾ ॥ Haj Kaabai Jaao N Theerathh Poojaa \|\| I do not make pilgrimages to Mecca, nor do I worship at Hindu sacred shrines."
	:First of all, please don't be rude - even if you think other people have been.

			@] , @] , @] , @] , @] - Can also share more light on this.
	:Secondly, what is the sentence you would like included? Please type it out. Keep in mind that no assumptions (POV) should be borne. ] 00:16, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

			== "The Definition of Sikh" ==
	::Yes, please provide the sentence or sentences you wish to add to the page with suitable citation. If it doesn't have a citation and it goes along the lines of "some Hindus believe..." or "some Sikhs believe..." then it won't be included (see ]).

			There is a portion of the page that references the definition for the Sikh as defined by the SGPC.
	::Secondly - and I'm not trying to have a go at you here - you may have noticed you've received a slightly hostile reception on Misplaced Pages. I think you should examine the tone that you use when discussing matters and try and understand why people can take things you say the wrong way. ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 00:23, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
	:::Here is the link.....].....And Sukh your getting the time frame wrong here....WHen I first debated u guys I was not sarcastic or mean in anyway....It was only AFTER people started calling me names and being sarcastic with me, that made me in turn act the same way....But what your doing is taking my comments out of context and saying "oooo look Aryan, maybe people are like this with you, becasue you act the same way with them...I know myself and I know what i typed....I didnt start it with them, they started it with me
	::::You cannot use another Misplaced Pages page as a reference. You can link to it, but it's not a citation. ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 10:46, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
	::::Let me make what I asked clearer. All we need from you is: 1) The exact sentence or sentences you wish to add, with any wiki links you wish to add AND 2) A citation supporting the claims made in your sentence (preferably a book, but a reputable web site will do). ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 11:18, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
	:::::But the article has links...it has evidence...it has references...why am I going to put down references when the article already has them? Im not useing the article as a reference....IM just trying to make the page simple and easy to understand....so if someone clicks the ] page then they can see the references for themselves!...What part dont u get? ] 20:49, 9 July 2006 (UTC)
	::::::I will not be continuing this conversation any further unless you provide both the line or two you wish to add and a citation supporting any of your claims about Sikhism and Hinduism being one (there are authors who have wrote about stuff like this, so finding such a citation shouldn't even be difficult). The ] article is a mess, and contains no inline citations to substantiate any of its claims. All you're doing now is wasting my time when I have better things to be doing. ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 21:13, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

			At the time of writing, this is the definition:
	Aryan, '''TELL US THE LINE YOU WANT TO INCORPORATE'''. Don't waste time talking about everything except that. ] 21:39, 9 July 2006 (UTC)

			The Definition of Sikh is any human being who faithfully believes in:
	:WAIT, the argument still stays, you said if someone dosen't belive that they are diffrent it wasen't up to me to remove it.

			I. One Immortal Being,
	:But the same could be said about you, if we don't buy it then why should you put it up? Besides your article is pretty one sided mabye you should equal it out so mabye we can put it up.

			II. Ten Gurus, from Guru Nanak Sahib to Guru Gobind Singh Sahib,
	:The article is one sided? Please explain to me what part of the article is not a fact...everything on their is a fact...no opinions...facts....anyway here is the sentence that i am trying to put up....It would say...."Their are a number of people that have always believed the Gurus were not trying to seperate people into a Hindu and Sikh catagory. They argue that Hinduism and Sikhism should be united and not seperated. For more information please see ]"....NOw is that bad?...Doesnt take up room from SUKH's precious page...Doesnt say its fact or opinion...it just says if u want more information click this...why is that bad?? ] 06:47, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

			III. The Guru Granth Sahib,
	::'''''Here's''''' a reference which mentions that some Sikhs claim the religions are the same but the writer of the article is actually against the idea. . It can be used as a source though there are probably better (I'm too lazy to look!) <b><font color="teal">]</font></b>''<sup><font color="teal">]</font></sup>'' <sup><b><font color="teal">]</font></b></sup> 07:57, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

			IV. The utterances and teachings of the ten Gurus and,
	:::Your reasons are some of the dumbest I have seen, a name is no reason to claim their is a connection. A Christian family can name their son Pizzaro, so would that make them Spanish?

			V. The baptism bequeathed by the tenth Guru, and who does not owe allegiance to any other religion, is a Sikh.
	:::Same with your intermarriage claims, I could marry a white girl, would that mean my religion as a bond with hers? No (Your argument is about family values, not Sikh and Hindu familys in general!).

			However, this definition is restrictive because there are other Sikh sects who do not technically fit this definition, so I propose that this portion of the text be removed from the page because it's technically inaccurate.
	:::I have never seen or heard of a Sikh going to a Hindu mandir, show some PROOF! O focurse I have seen some HIndus coming to Gurdwaras when they need help. SHOW YOUR SOURCES FOR THESE CLAIMS

			This is not to comment on the SGPC in any way, rather to make sure that the Sikhism Misplaced Pages article is the most accurate when it comes to all Sikhs, not just the majority.
	:::So if the son was Sikh and the family wasen't that means theirs a connection? WHERES THE PROOF?
	:::Again this argument is on family values, how do you know those familys accepted it with open arms? Hey with that idealogy I guess I cam convert to into a Christian or what ever so 50 years after im gone people will look back and say my religion could possibly be linked to Sikhism!

			Thoughts? ] (]) 15:02, 12 April 2024 (UTC)
	:::12 July 2006 (UTC) {{unsigned\|Elven6}}

			:I agree, many heterodoxical groups do not fall within the SGPC-crafted definition of a Sikh, such as Udasis or Nanakpanthis. ] (]) 13:58, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
	::::Elven6, I must have asked you many many times - please sign your posts using <nowiki>~~~~</nowiki>! This automatically converts to your name and the date/time you posted.
			::In an effort to amend the definition of Sikh to include other Sikh traditions, like the Udasis, Nirmalas, Nanakpanthis, etc, I believe the text ought to be changed to:
			::The Definition of Sikh is any human being who faithfully believes in:
			::I. One Immortal Being,
			::II. The first Sikh Guru as Guru Nanak
			::III. The utterances and teachings as enscribed in the Guru Granth Sahib is a Sikh.
			::For the first two points, at the bare minimum, all Sikh traditions all orginate from Guru Nanak, so all must agree to view Nanak as the first Sikh and the first Guru. Similarly, since all Sikhs hold Nanak as the first Guru, then all must accept his teachings and writings that enscribe God as a singular, immortal being.
			::For the third point, I'm unsure how different Sikh traditions approach reading from the Guru Granth Sahib. For example, ] maintain a living Guru as a part of their religious canon however, I'm unsure if they also read from the Guru Granth Sahib as a part of their liturgical practices and if so, do they still refer to the Guru Granth Sahib as "Guru", or does it default back to the "Adi Granth" in their case?
			::All said, I believe this definition is definitely more accurate for the modern day since it would account for all Sikhs under the various traditions and sects as well as those Sikhs who have not undergone the initiation rites to receive Amrit. ] (]) 20:01, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

			== Sikhism separating from Hinduism ==
	::::"I have never seen or heard of a Sikh going to a Hindu mandir" - I have. '''Plenty''' of Sikhs visit mandirs, especially in the Punjab. The situation outside of India is different, but inside India, Sikhs visit Gurdwaras, Mandirs and Sufi burial sites. Hindus too visit Gurdwaras and Sufi burial sites. Hindus and Sikhs get on very well in Punjab, contrary to what the media may say relating to the events of the 1980s and they still visit one another's places of worship.

			Any sources to support this claim? I’ve reverted this unsourced addition to the infobox. ] (]) 13:53, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
	::::Thank-you for posting a link DaGizza. I'll see if I can accommodate a line or two in the article. ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 20:15, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

			== Pronunciation ==
	:::::'''Sukh's point is true''' On a visit last year to ], I visited the ] and saw several Hindu and Sikh men and women paying their respects. ] 20:19, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

			I have heard Sikh's themselves pronounce it like "sick" not "seek" despite what the Oxford Dictionary claims.
	::::::I've added a section "Relationship with Hinduism" in "Sikh people" (I'm not really sure where to put it). It's a bit rough at the moment. Please tell me what you think. ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 20:41, 12 July 2006 (UTC)
	::::::This paragraph is only temporary. Please list your objections/comments so we can finalise the content, then we can mix the actual content in with the rest of the page. ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 21:39, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

			Can anyone elaborate on what should be the correct phonetic spelling? ] (]) 17:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
	We are not saying that a name proves anything....it doesnt....BUT These are not regular names like CARLOS, JATIN, MIKE, OR JASPREET....THese are HARDCORE RELIGIOUS NAMES...When u name your son HAR KRISHAN...OR RAM DAS....OR RAM RAI....I mean come on thats pretty dam Hindu...Do u know what those names mean?....If ur a Guru and u name ur son HAR KRISHAN are u gonna say the Guru didn beleive in Krishna? If ur a Guru and u name ur son RAM are u gonna say the guru doesnt believe in Ram?....I mean this is not 2006 when u name ur son David....This is the time of the Gurus giving out hardcore religious names....Its like somebody naming their son PRAISE JESUS....are u gonna say the father didnt believe in Jesus?? ] 05:47, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

			:Hi,
	:Do you think people pull names out of their rear ends? It was the time of course people would name their kids like that, after all their weren't many Sikh names. {{unsigned\|Elven6}}
			:The correct phonetic pronounciation is indeed closer "sik" than "seek". To be fair, the Oxford Dictionary contains both pronounciations, likely to support both cases.
	::Please sign your posts. ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 19:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)
			:The latter pronounciation arose during the British annexation of Punjab and became popular during the subsequent rise of the Sikh overseas diaspora in Britain, Canada, and the US. ] (]) 19:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

	:This is a FUNNY argument to make for someone whose username reflects a neo-Nazi symbol... ] 06:28, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

	::Aryan, I think this is where you say 'touché'. Also, please don't ruin the indentation of posts. It makes them difficult to follow. Also, I'm reverting most of your changes . This is a ''featured'' article and we don't appreciate controversial additions without citations. None of the present sources agree with what you have added. Also, you've changed a direct quote from Khushwant Singh - this is VERY misleading. Do not do this please. ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 09:54, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

	:::Sukh u are the worst....I mean u finally put up a link for Hinduism and sikhism as ONE...U ask everyone to help out on it , since its not 100% fixed....Then I come in and make the most minor of changes...and u erase it all...I its ok if u didnt think that i did the best job...But why would u erase everything? I Mean some of the changes that I made were just changes such as the structure of a sentence.....Thats it....I mean did u have to change EVERYTHING?....U know its people like u that make wikipeida soooo frustrating...Its like u own everything ] 18:14, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

	::::I didn't change everything you wrote. If you cannot see why changing a quote is wrong, or why adding comments such as "Scholars such as Singh argue that the Gurus never intended to seperate people into a Hindu and Sikh catagory. That they were instead trying to unite everyone under God. " without reference to a single scholar who said that is wrong, then I cannot help you.
	::::I have mentioned to you time and time again that your additions need to be cited. If you cannot provide references, I WILL remove them. And no, I don't own the article, but you seem to be unable to take any constructive criticsm. ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 19:25, 13 July 2006 (UTC)


	This topic is pointless, in my last post to remove this garbage you said we shoulden't remove it because I say so.
	Well guess what I think you shoulden't add it just because YOU want it here! {{unsigned\|Elven6}}

	:'''Please sign your posts!''' ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 15:33, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

	== My tuppence ==

	I agree with ]'s statement. As the "name" issue has been raked up, let me give some illustrations from the great ]-]-] monotheistic tradition of the ]. It has been noted by theologians that the relationship between these three faiths is perhaps the most unique amongst organised religions of the world. Here is a list of figures common to the three:
	# Adam(Judaeo-Christian) and Aadam(Muslim)
	# Eve(J-C) and Havva(M)
	# Cain/Kane(J-C) and Cabin(M)
	# Avraham(Hebrew), Abraham(English) and Ibrahim(Arabic)
	# Lot(J-C) and Lut(M)
	# Ezekiel (J-C) and Dhul-Kifl(M)
	# Sarah(J-C) and Sara(M)
	# Hagar (J-C) and Hajra(M)
	# Isaac(J-C) and Ishaaq(Arabic)
	# Ishmael(J-C) and Ismail(M)
	# Jacob (J-C) and Yakub(M)
	# Rachel (J-C) and Raheel(M)
	# Joseph(J-C) and Yusuf(M)
	# Jethro(J-C) and Shoaib(M)
	# Jonah(J-C) and Yunus(M)
	# Job(J-C) and Ayub(M)
	# Moshe(Hebrew), Moses(English) and Musa(Arabic)
	# Aaron(J-C) and Haroon(M)
	# Joshua
	# Gideon
	# Caleb
	# Elijah(J-C) and Illyas(M)
	# David(J-C) and Dawood(M)
	# Solomon(J-C) amd Suleman/Sulayman(M)
	# Shimshon(Hebrew) and Samson(English)
	# Shimuel(Hebrew) and Samuel(English)
	# Gabriel(J-C) and Jibril(M)
	# Michael(J-C) and Mikaeel(M)
	# Alexander who is called Sikandar or Zulqernain in the Qu'ran
	# Daniel(J-C) and Danyal(M)
	# St. John the Baptist is Yahya in the Qu'ran
	# Mary(J-C) and Marium(M)
	# Jesus who is Isa-Ale-Salaam in the Qu'ran
	# Shimon(Hebrew) and Simon(English)
	# Zacharias (J-C) and Zakarya(M)

	In spite of there being so many similarities, there is the paradox of the three: So intrinsically linked and yet so bitterly separated. Compared to these Abrahmic faiths, the relationship between their Dharmic counterparts (Hinduism, Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism) has been much more peaceful.

	As for the Hinduism-Sikhism controversy that has been raging on this page, here's my take:

	Larry Collins and Dominique Lapierre, in their masterpiece, ''Freedom at Midnight'' have described Sikhism as:

	"Sikhism was born from the impact of monotheistic Islam on polytheistic Hinduism on the warring frontiers of the Punjab, where the two faiths first collided."

	I don't want to comment on the theological similarities between the two as I am not an expert. But being a Punjabi Hindu myself, and that too from the Arora and Khatri communities, I can very much say that socially the two were very close. No one can deny that. I myself had Sikh ancestors, though today my family is mostly Hindu. This ''Roti-Beti Ka Rishta'' is undeniable.

	Personally, I hold extremists on both sides as culpable for the 'great schism' that has occured between the two groups socially.

	However, whatever has happened has happened. Khushwant Singh in the newer editions of his masterpiece, ''A history of the Sikhs'' has noted that though peace has returned to Punjab, the relationship between its two communities has drastically changed and will never be the same as before.

	It is the Punjab which has suffered. The divide of Muslim and Non-Muslim in'47 and Hindu and Sikh in '84. Religion has been the biggest bane and scourge of our province as in other parts of the Subcontinent.

	] 09:26, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

	:Hi Rajat - I think you overrate the "extemists." The fact is that Indian political and religious groups do not represent the communities of India as much as the media likes to think. While living in Bombay, I witnessed the 1992 riots, the Ambedkar riots and several other disturbances - I discovered that over 95% of people do not associate themselves, nor support the people creating all the hooplah - this includes the poor. This is one of the reasons that life in Bombay is normal even after the recent bomb blasts - the other reason is that 18 million people cannot be asked to sit on their bums for a whole day. People have to eek out a living, come hell or high water.

	:The Hindu-Sikh riots were caused by the conflagration between the Congress and the Bhindranwale militia - they should be accurately termed the "Congress-Bhindranwale riots." 98% of Hindus and Sikhs did not condone it, nor associated themselves with the perpetrators. Obviously there was anger over Indira Gandhi's killing and the storming of the Golden Temple, but common people weren't prepared to kill over this.

	:The situation during partition was different because more than 20 million common people were displaced in violent and high-pressure circumstances. Bereft of their homes, heritage and homeland, people turned to violence. I don't blame them.

	:Cowardly mobs only attack unarmed civilians - if they attack police or each other, they'll find out the true meaning of violence. Common Hindus and Sikhs were distressed at what happened, and mostly people are anxious in these situations only because of fear of the mobs invading their neighbourhood. When raving lunatics parade through a street, the people in homes obviously get anxious. ] 20:19, 13 July 2006 (UTC)

	::Well, Sir, we can only hope and pray that what you say is true. Like Lincoln said after Appomattox, "We have won the war. Now we have to win the peace; the hearts and minds of the people."

	::Actually, by extremists I did not mean Bhindranwale and Co. and the Congress, who indeed would take the lion's share for the whole problem. I was hinting at the Arya Samaj (of which I am ironically a member), which on its formation in 1875 in Bombay by Swami Dayanand, became immensely popular among Hindus of the Punjab and the United Provinces.

	::Swami Dayanand fired the first salvo, by calling Nanak a ''dambhi''(hypocrite). To him, only the Vedas were the Supreme Truth. His followers followed suit and attacked the other Gurus and the Granth as well. Dayanand in his book , "Satyarth Prakash" also attacked the persons of Jesus and the Prophet. The Arya Samaj followed all this with an aggressive '']'' campaign across the province.

	::''Phir Kya tha''. The hawks on the Sikh side joined in the ''party''. The coming years would see the formation of the Singh Sabhas, the Chief Khalsa Diwan, revival of interest in the Punjabi language and the Gurmukhi script, the rise of eminent authors such as Bhai Vir Singh who saw language and script as being cognate to religion and of course that watershed work by Bhai Kahan Singh of Nabha - "Hum Hindu Nahin."

	::This of course was the first phase of the division. The second phase came during Partition. Demands for a sovereign Sikh state were first floated because some felt that, "The Hindus got Hindustan and the Muslims got Pakistan. But what did we Sikhs get out of it?" However, Nehru and the Congress Party assured the Sikh leadership of equal rights for the community in an independent India and hence the demand stayed as it was. But not for long.

	::The Sikh leadership wanted a state with a Sikh majority. When it was decided to reorganize the Indian map on a linguistic basis, the leadership first floated the idea of a "Punjabi Suba" to be carved out of erstwhile East Punjab which comprised of Haryana, today's Punjab and Himachal Pradesh. Himachal separated in the '50s while Haryana came into being in '66.

	::But the most negative fallout - Yeah, you guessed it right. Language being co-related with religion. Punjabi Hindus, coaxed by Arya Samaj leaders like Lala Jagat Narain (by sheer coincidence, a distant relative of mine), declared Hindi rather than Punjabi to be their mother tongue in the '51 and '61 Census so that the Punjabi Suba which would be a Sikh majority state did not come into being. This caused great heartburn to the Sikhs, who considered it as an outright betrayal.

	::And later came the Green Revolution with its prosperity, which in turn led to many Sikhs giving up the external emblems of their faith - their hair and beards and taking to smoking and drinking.

	::There was also the sensitive issue of being a minority group in an overwhelmingly Hindu majority country. The fear of being "reabsorbed", the question of identity -whatever you choose to call it.

	::The problem of the Sant Nirankaris, who had recognized a living person as their Guru and thus violated the most basic commandment of the faith.

	::The bickering between the Congress (read Mrs. Gandhi) and the Akalis - leading to the row over sharing of river waters, the issue of Chandigarh and transfer of Punjabi-speaking areas in Haryana back to Punjab.

	::And in the midst of all this, appeared a lean, tall rustic preacher by the name of Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale from the village of Rode, who had studied from the seminary of Damdami Taksal.

	::You had it all. Only a spark was needed. That came in the form of the beheading of Baba Gurbachan Singh, the Guru of the Sant Nirankaris in '78 or '79 (I don't remember exactly). But since that day, the whole state saw and bathed in red.

	::There is still a lot of resentment in the minds and hearts of certain members of the Sikh community. It may not appear on the surface but it still simmers underneath. All of us who hold the interests of the Punjab and India dear, can only wish that never again should such a vicissitude be perpetrated on us Punjabis, who have been at the receiving end for over five millenia.

	::As it is, the state is today completely reabsorbed into the national mainstream. Now is the time for a redressal of other pressing social problems: a skewed sex-ratio, large scale-migration from the Hindi belt, which some believe could cause a demographic change and lastly, farmers' suicides (Yeah, I am sure all know that farmers even in the country's breadbasket are killing themselves like their counterparts in the Deccan). ] 07:53, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

	:::And the lack of industrialisation of the state, the infrastructure mess ( Haryana learned from Chandigarh, even villages in Haryana have better roads, sectors and bus stands than the towns in Punjab.Huda is now ensuring that even smaller towns of 50000 + population are planned, and people cannot make houses arbitrarily but have to follow guidelines) One should see the condition of the main bus stands in Ludhiana, Jalndhar or Amritsar. Or the lack of planning and roads in all of these towns. This for a state that was the first to take roads and electricity till the village level. Apart from ] none of the Chief Ministers have built infrastructure in Punjab. ] 09:53, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

	::::Very true. Also alongside the agricultural sector, you have Gurgoan and Faridabad, satellite towns of the National Capital allright but BPO hubs nonetheless. So you already have a nascent Services sector in the making in Haryana.

	::::What's more Hooda recently made a master-stroke by inviting Mukesh Ambani to set up shop and SEZs in the state.

	::::Compare this with Punjab. The manufacturing (Hoisery and others) sector is in doldrums. Services have appeared. But only in Chandigarh's satellite town of Mohali. Proximity to Chandigarh rather than individual enterprise is the cause.

	::::And finally, the agricultural sector - I don't need to speak more about it.] 12:24, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

	==]==

	Ok so I decided to let the guy put his article up, if he could put one up about how the two are the same then could I put one up about the Hinduization of Sikhism? Their both contoversial topics that are threating the Sikh way of life.

	Elven6 July 14 2006 UTC

	== Sikhism Wikiproject ==

	Hi,

	If there is enough support, I'm thinking of starting a ] for Sikhism. If you are interested in joining, please say so below! ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 18:53, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

	# ] 20:52, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
	# ] 20:54, 14 July 2006 (UTC)
	# ] \| <span style="color: green;" lang="pa">ਸੁਖ</span> \| ] 21:32, 14 July 2006 (UTC) (as per nom!)
	# ] 22:47, 14 July 2006 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 14:17, 8 December 2024

The contentious topics procedure applies to this page. This page is related to India, Pakistan, and Afghanistan, which has been designated as a contentious topic.

Editors who repeatedly or seriously fail to adhere to the purpose of Misplaced Pages, any expected standards of behaviour, or any normal editorial process may be blocked or restricted by an administrator. Editors are advised to familiarise themselves with the contentious topics procedures before editing this page.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Sikhism article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6Auto-archiving period: 3 months

This article is written in Indian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, travelled, centre, analysed, defence) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other varieties of English. According to the relevant style guide, this should not be changed without broad consensus.

Sikhism is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Misplaced Pages's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 17, 2006.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
June 16, 2006	Peer review	Reviewed
July 2, 2006	Featured article candidate	Promoted
August 17, 2009	Featured article review	Demoted

Current status: Former featured article

This

level-3 vital article is rated B-class on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale.
It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

India: Punjab Top‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Misplaced Pages's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.
	Punjab portal This article is supported by WikiProject Punjab (India) (assessed as Top-importance).
	This article is a selected article on the India portal, which means that it was selected as a high quality India-related article.

Pakistan Low‑importance

	Pakistan portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pakistan, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pakistan on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PakistanWikipedia:WikiProject PakistanTemplate:WikiProject PakistanPakistan
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Religion Top‑importance

	Religion portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Religion, a project to improve Misplaced Pages's articles on Religion-related subjects. Please participate by editing the article, and help us assess and improve articles to good and 1.0 standards, or visit the wikiproject page for more details.ReligionWikipedia:WikiProject ReligionTemplate:WikiProject ReligionReligion
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Sikhism

This article is part of WikiProject Sikhism, an attempt to promote better coordination, content distribution, and cross-referencing between pages dealing with Sikhism. Please participate by editing the article, or visit the project page for more details on the projects.

Guidelines: Manual of Style - Naming conventionsSikhismWikipedia:WikiProject SikhismTemplate:WikiProject SikhismSikhism

To-do list for Sikhism: edit · history · watch · refresh · Updated 2015-05-13

Long term

These points are outside of the scope of the current article. Sub-articles are required to expand on certain topics.

Further information on decision making in Sikhism
Philosophy of teachings, major social changes in Punjab
Sikh traditions, culture, family values and religious adherence.
The concept of 'Sarbat da Bhala' (the welfare of humanity) is an important concept in sikhism and needs to be covered.
Sikhism by country

There is a request, submitted by Sikhism, for an audio version of this article to be created. For further information, see WikiProject Spoken Misplaced Pages.

The rationale behind the request is: "Please make 'Sikhism' an audio recording because it is one of the world's major religions, and making it a recording would allow adherents who are visually impaired the ability to hear about the tenets of their faith and the issues that effect Sikhs".

Ridiculous claims of 120 million Sikhs with spurious sources

Removing these. Unreferenced news articles are not adequate sources for this claim — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.54.107.213 (talk • contribs) 21:28, September 20, 2021 (UTC)

Inaccurate edits made by User without sources to back it

This User:Joshua_Jonathan has made an this edit alongside a few others all of a sudden since last week. Which is strange as this did not happen for over 6 months since the info box was created. One of those users who made an edit was User:Mattansilk who was also banned for being sockpuppet ( Just to reiterate I am not saying Joshua or others are related parties of Mattansilk). **Also to note they have made these edits with NO sources and constantly reverting them**

I have no issue with it being referred to as a Dharmic faith. As we share some similar core values and beliefs and should maintain unity with each other.

So the two issues i want to address was: 1) Slogan: This user along with the other users who made the same edits are finding it hard to differentiate between a Sikh jakhaira/Slogan (Bole So Nihal, Sat Sri Akal) and Sikh greeting (Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Fateh). As per Bole So Nihal it clearly states this is the Sikh Slogan as well. https://www.discoversikhism.com/sikhism/bole_so_nihal_sat_sri_akal.html

2) Sikhism did not separate from Hinduism or any other religion. Sikhs themselves view Guru Nanak was Sikh from birth as the Gurus are a reflection of God. There are many instances of Guru Nanak rejected Hindu practices from at a young age such as sacred thread, caste system etc...

I.e He rejected the sacred Hindu thread as a young boy. Furthermore in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib he states "ਹਜ ਕਾਬੈ ਜਾਉ ਨ ਤੀਰਥ ਪੂਜਾ ॥ Haj Kaabai Jaao N Theerathh Poojaa || I do not make pilgrimages to Mecca, nor do I worship at Hindu sacred shrines."

@Usingh0663 , @Jattlife121 , @Javerine , @Ronnie Macroni , @Twarikh e Khalsa - Can also share more light on this.

"The Definition of Sikh"

There is a portion of the page that references the definition for the Sikh as defined by the SGPC.

At the time of writing, this is the definition:

The Definition of Sikh is any human being who faithfully believes in:

I. One Immortal Being,

II. Ten Gurus, from Guru Nanak Sahib to Guru Gobind Singh Sahib,

III. The Guru Granth Sahib,

IV. The utterances and teachings of the ten Gurus and,

V. The baptism bequeathed by the tenth Guru, and who does not owe allegiance to any other religion, is a Sikh.

However, this definition is restrictive because there are other Sikh sects who do not technically fit this definition, so I propose that this portion of the text be removed from the page because it's technically inaccurate.

This is not to comment on the SGPC in any way, rather to make sure that the Sikhism Misplaced Pages article is the most accurate when it comes to all Sikhs, not just the majority.

Thoughts? AnyBurro9312 (talk) 15:02, 12 April 2024 (UTC)

I agree, many heterodoxical groups do not fall within the SGPC-crafted definition of a Sikh, such as Udasis or Nanakpanthis. MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 13:58, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

In an effort to amend the definition of Sikh to include other Sikh traditions, like the Udasis, Nirmalas, Nanakpanthis, etc, I believe the text ought to be changed to:

The Definition of Sikh is any human being who faithfully believes in:

I. One Immortal Being,

II. The first Sikh Guru as Guru Nanak

III. The utterances and teachings as enscribed in the Guru Granth Sahib is a Sikh.

For the first two points, at the bare minimum, all Sikh traditions all orginate from Guru Nanak, so all must agree to view Nanak as the first Sikh and the first Guru. Similarly, since all Sikhs hold Nanak as the first Guru, then all must accept his teachings and writings that enscribe God as a singular, immortal being.

For the third point, I'm unsure how different Sikh traditions approach reading from the Guru Granth Sahib. For example, Namdhari Sikhs maintain a living Guru as a part of their religious canon however, I'm unsure if they also read from the Guru Granth Sahib as a part of their liturgical practices and if so, do they still refer to the Guru Granth Sahib as "Guru", or does it default back to the "Adi Granth" in their case?

All said, I believe this definition is definitely more accurate for the modern day since it would account for all Sikhs under the various traditions and sects as well as those Sikhs who have not undergone the initiation rites to receive Amrit. AnyBurro9312 (talk) 20:01, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Sikhism separating from Hinduism

Any sources to support this claim? I’ve reverted this unsourced addition to the infobox. MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 13:53, 11 May 2024 (UTC)

Pronunciation

I have heard Sikh's themselves pronounce it like "sick" not "seek" despite what the Oxford Dictionary claims.

Can anyone elaborate on what should be the correct phonetic spelling? 91.217.105.54 (talk) 17:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi,

The correct phonetic pronounciation is indeed closer "sik" than "seek". To be fair, the Oxford Dictionary contains both pronounciations, likely to support both cases.

The latter pronounciation arose during the British annexation of Punjab and became popular during the subsequent rise of the Sikh overseas diaspora in Britain, Canada, and the US. AnyBurro9312 (talk) 19:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)

Categories: