Sikhism in comparison to Hinduism (an opinionated view)

Society Religion & Philosophy
21

Rani, I apologize if you took that as personal attack. I was saying it to supporters of the thought that Sikhism was created to only and only to protect hindus form muslims and not specifically to you.

I repeat my question again as the whole distinction depends upon this syntax/semantics in Guru Granth Sahib.

Rani, is Guru Gobind Singh "refering to God as Shiva"? or he "prayed and refered to God Shiva."?

ZZ, can you give me some information on Devi Chandi that you refer that Guru Gobind Singh is refering to in Chandi di vaar? Where is its Mandir/ashthaan and what is its status in Hinduism? Which part of India mostly its followers are from?

Also, there is an incident in Guru Gobind Singh's life at which time Guru Gobind Singh wrote "Chandi di Vaar". If you know what it is you will certainly know Chandi di vaar is not about the Hindu devi Chandi(if there is any) but exactly opposite.

22

I agree with ZZ that it is a recent political exercise to show that Sikhism is equidistant from Islam and Hinduism. Personally I have no problems with Sikhism being a seperate religion -- never really thought about it. Its a minor thing. And if some Sikhs feel that their distinct culture is being deliberately destroyed by "Hindus" (note: not Indians) then I suppose they have every right to defend their "culture" from being eroded in every way. There can be differences of opinion in India and everyone has a right and should be allowed to hold that opinion as long as they are not imposing anything. So I dont see where the confusion is -- if its a seperate religion fine, no problems. If you think Sikhism is as close to Islam as it is to Hinduism then I guess we'll see a lot more inter-religious marriages between Sikhs and Muslims -- which is a good thing.
The fact is that Sikhs like Hindus are not extremely religious, so they donot ask whether their holy book allows certain things before they do it. Thats the reason you see so many Sikhs in Hindu temples a lot of times. So maybe Sikhism doesn't teach you to bow before anything other than the Granth Sahib but a lot of Sikhs donot seem have any problems praying in a temple. Or maybe the Sikhs I have seen are exceptions.

23

BK, I think I agree most part of your message. Let me assure you there is no movement amongst Sikhs to prove or argue that Sikhism is equidistant from Hinduism and Islam but the movement that I and many other Sikhs argue against is the movement to prove that Sikhism is a sect of Hinduism and Sikhs are basically Hindus.
It is one thing to say that Sikhism has elements or principles that seem to have their origin in both Hinduism and Islam(who can deny that?) and it is totally different thing to say that Sikhs in their behaviour, habits, and practice of their religion are more similar to Hindus than Muslims. I will difinitely agree with the later resemblence since majority of the Sikhs came from practicing Hindu families and particularly for the last 50 yrs have lived next to Hindus only. On the same token are not Muslims of the sub continent more closer in resemeblance of their culture, practice of their religion, behaviour and habits etc to Hindus than Arabs. After all praying at kabars, going to the pirs/babas for mannats and charhaing chadars on the tombs etc is not exactly the central theme of Islam.

Being a Sikh I have no problem accepting your belief whatever it is unless it interferes in my rights or anyone else's rights. As a result I have no problem going to the temple, mosque or anyother such place. It is my way of respecting and accepting what your religion is. Also if I go with you to the temple and do a ceremonial bow in front of Ganesh ji's satute, I am not really praying in front of it. Because I don't have faith in Ganesh ji. On the other hand if I bow in front of a pic of a Guru, since I have inner link/religious faith in Guru, I will be praying to the picture which is wrong because I should be praying words of the Guru by practicing them not bow in front of his picture.

Also this talk about creating strict idenity boundaries does not apply only to Sikhs. Sikhs being a minority might be over reacting to safeguard their identity and culture. That is only the effect/reaction. It is not the cause. Cause is something else. Cause is people from out of state coming to our villages and telling us that we are Hindus and there is no such thing as distinct Sikh qoum (Yes BK ji it is first hand latest info from Punjab). If we follow that path what is next? Sikhs being asked to prove and show that they are Hindustanis like it is being asked from Chrisitians and Muslims?

24

This is a roundabout reply. At least here, nobody is bothered about whether Sikhs are subsect of Hindus or not, but definitely there is much more influence of Hinduism on Sikhism than aything else. The philosophy is entirely Vedantic as we argued before. those who want, can check the old thread 'are sikhs hindus in disguise' started by, who else, mr. xtreme.

It is mainly this century that a book 'hum hindu naheen' was written. The earlier Sikhs including gurus were not so concerned in separating themselves out. As far as ur advice to Rani on Hindus being able to defend themselves, one only wishes that Guru Tegbahdur dev ji was a better Sikh than u are. Current politics needs paranoia when there is need for none and it is reflected in this 'Hindu-Hindu' shouting. Otherwise Sikhism and Sikhs are fine and notheing particular is going to be achieved by driving the wedge between Hindus and Sikhs. No that there have not been attempts, nicely supported from across the border, which fortunately failed because Indian Sikhs know their interests better than Canadians do.

The vested interests are going as far as to have a new calender so that Hindus and Sikhs celebrate Holi and Divali on different dates. Were all Sikhs in past less Sikhs than new ones? But that is not pertinent when it comes to political gains.

[This message has been edited by ZZ (edited October 20, 2000).]

25

Chan,
I agree that if someone tells you that you're a Hindu then you have every right to be mad at him. The reason I get mad sometimes is when someone tries to say that there is a distinct movement to change the cultural identity of minorities ! If the RSS has their views no one is forcing them on anyone -- the government isn't. If the government is then we have a problem ! So why generalize and say that India is becoming intolerant and communal. We can allow a Muslim cleric to make anti-India speeches, we can allow the Hurriyat leaders to hold press conferences in Delhi (no less) but when some RSS guys make a few statements we're all upset. Don't generalize and say that India is targetting its minorities.

26

Guru Teg Bahadur was a great man because he gave his life for the oppressed and mazloom. I am sure he would have given his life for Jains with same passion if it were Jains who were oppressed by Hindus. Great men don't stand up against tyrants based on what religion they are. People who think Teg Bahadur gave life for Hindus only, belittle his sacrifice.

yes it would be great if there were no boudaries between religions and languages and cultures. We would have all be happy in that lala land but guess what?, it is not so. More you want to erase them, more they will get highlighted.

27

I thought I will cut and paste what I wrote before.

                I would post **second house of bhairov** by namdevji (translation by sant singh khalsa, no question of authenticity since it is **part of siri guru granth sahib**). wonder what chaan mahi has to say on that since the word Hindu has come quite often in this excerp.

                bhairov first tells the story of hiranyakashyap and pralhad, which i am not repeating (for those who don't know hindu mythology, it is story of lord vishnu taking incarnation to save his devotee pralhad) after than namdevji writes

              *  The sultan said "Listen Naam Dayv, let me see the actions of your Lord| | The Sultan arrested Naam Dayv, and said "Let me see your beloved Lord | | Pause | | "Bring this dead cow back to life Otherwise, I shall cut your head here and now" | | Naam Dayv answered, "O king, how can this happen? No one can bring dead to life| | I can not do anything by my own actions. Whatever Lord does, that alone happens| | The arrogant king was enraged by the reply. He incited an elephant to attack| | *Naam Dayv's mother began to cry and she said "why don't you abandon your Lord Raam and worship Lord Allah"| |* Naam Dayv answered "i am not your son and you are not my mother. Even if body dies, I will still sing the praises of the Lord."| |

The elephant attacked him by the trunk but Naam Dayv was saved, protected by the lord| * The king said "The Qazis and Mullahs bow down to me but this Hindu trampled my honor| |* The people pleaded with the king "Hear our prayer, oh king, take the Naam dayv's weight in gold and release him| | The king replied "If I take goldthen I will be consigned to hell, by forsaking my faith and gathering worldly wealth"| | With his feet in chains Naam Dayv kept the beat with his hands, singing the praises of the Lord"| | "Even if the Ganges and Jamuna flow backwards, I will still continue singing praises of the Lord| | Three hours passed and even then the Lord of three worlds has not come| | Playing on the instrument of the feathered wings, the Lord of universe came, mounted on the eagle, Garura| | He cherished His devotee and the lord came mounted on the eagle, garura | | The Lord said to him "If you wish, I shall turn the earth sideways, If you wish, I shall turn it upside down| | If you wish I shall bring the dead cow to life. Everyone will see and be convinced"| | Naam Dayv prayed and milked the cow. He brought the calf to the cow and milked her| | When the pitcher was filled with milk, Naam Dayv took it and placed it before the king| | The king went into his palace and his heart was troubled | | Through the Qazis and the Mullahs, king offered a prayer "Forgive me, please, oh Hindu, I am just a cow before you"| | Naam Dayv said, "Listen oh king; have I done the miracle| | The purpose of the miracle is that you, O king should walk on the path of truth and humility"| | Naam Dayv became famous everywhere. The Hindus all went together with Naam Dayv| |*

               ** Now which Lord was Naam Dayv praying? Which Lord sits on Garura? Which religion has concept of three worlds and lord of three worlds? Why sultan said that this hindu sullied his honor? Why Naam Dayv did not agree when his mother advised him to abandon Lord Raam and worship Lord Allah?**

                Maybe Chaan Maahi can tell us.

One more question.** Does Chan mahi believe in the lala story of Pralhad and Hiranyakasyapu?** He should. It is in Guru Granth Sahib. If he selectively believes thing to keep proper distance from lalas, that is interesting viewpoint but not sikhism.

And a final question about equidistance, why none blinks the eye when lala marries sikh boy or girl and swords come out when it is with muslim sikh marriage.

[This message has been edited by ZZ (edited October 20, 2000).]

28

lala land:) Calm down I did not say Lala=Hindu land in my post above.......it was La La land as in english expression.(since you did not get it,I might have spelled it wrong or used it improperly. but the thought of Lala land did not even cross my mind until i read your post but It did hit a nerve with you, didn't it?).

Bhagat Namdev ji was a Hindu by religion, Baba Farid was a Muslim, Bhagat Ravidas was a shudar. They have all written about their faith and experiences in GGS with great morals to learn from. You need to learn more about the use of symbols and analogies in Guru Granth Sahib. If Namdev is proud of being a Hindu and worshiping Ram what is wrong with it? How does that prove that Sikhs are Hindus but nothing more? Why should he give up his lord Ram and say Allah Allah on Sultan's order? Why should one give up his Allah and say Ram Ram on an authority's order?

This story of Bhagat Namdev has a great moral which you have clearly missed and swept away by the word Hindu being in GGS...oh my God word Hindu is in GGS, Sikhs got be Hindu. How could they bow in front of it(a books which has word Hindu in it) and not be Hindu. Very cute. Moral is one has the right to believe and practice what his faith is. Of course you don't seem to agree with Bhagat Namdev.

About swords. That is all cultural. Of course you have lived in big cities and not seen swords get raised when a Sikh girl marries a Hindu boy. For your general knowledge that happens too. Unless you know of a quote from GGS that encourages such behaviour?

29

[quote]
Originally posted by ChannMahi:
**
oh my God word Hindu is in GGS, Sikhs got be Hindu. ?**
[/quote]

Is that my logic?? I believe, the story wont get place in Guru Granth Sahib unless there is belief in story of Lord Vishnu coming on Garura to rescue him. If u believe in this excerp, you should believe that Lord Vishnu indeed came on Garura to help him out and you should as well believe in story of Pralhad and Hiranyakashyapu. How does it work with the theory of equidistance?

A friend of mine got married to a Sikh girl by arranged * marriage. I wonder how long, if it happens would take for a muslim-sikh *arranged marriage.

[This message has been edited by ZZ (edited October 20, 2000).]

30

I find that talk of people who are not Sikh trying to show that Sikhism is a sect of Hinduism completely baffling.

I would suggest to the same people to go on and in the same way prove that Christianity is just a sect of Judiasm.. there is more merit in that as Jesus himself said 'i am no more than a rabbi' (rabbi being a jewish cleric)

If someone wants to be identified as a separate religion let them..

I think more should be said when someone says they are part of a religion while not accepting the beliefs..after all religion is like a secret society or a fraternity where you have to abide by the rules of the association to be called part of it. If I am part of Group A and someone else is part of Group B, that person cannot say he is a member of Group A unless he abides by Group A's rules.

31

You are missing the point entirely, blackzero. Let me put a statement that 'christianity is as similar to judaism as it is to hinduism'. Will u not treat to it as being ridiculous. Precisely the same reaction here. take care.

32

On of the most important similarity between Hinduism and Sikhism is that both believe in direct relationship of human being with God without any intermediary. Whereas, Abramical religions believe that human beings need intermediatory to intercede on their behalf and God only listens to intermediatory (Prophet).

[This message has been edited by Rani (edited October 21, 2000).]

33

Marrying a muslim involves a clear ceremonial conversion of religion which is not the case with any other major religion in the world. Most other religions leave it to the individuals. In India, since the girl moves to boy's home after wedding, she slowly and slowly adopts his religion over time. The more modern and liberal type muslims who don't care much about religious conversion have married Sikhs although rare cases.
Hindu Sikh marriages are not that common as you would like people to beleive. It is mostly amongst first or second generation Sikhs or some other love marriage cases which are not religion motivated anyway. Lot of sikh girls and boys are marrying christians in the west. May be they found some closeness of religion with them that we don't know of.

34

Ah! Let us be little more honest in arguments. Common or uncommon, do we see an arranged wedding between Sikh and Christian in west or east. Even in case when parents wanted the boy/girl to marry gurusikh only, will the level of resistance be same if he married a hindu or christian or muslim? If not, why?

35

Rani.

You have definitely missed the subtance of what I had posted.

Whether it be Shiva, Allah, or anyone. One thing Guru Nanak states is.

God is ONE

,he is still ONE regardless of what NAME you call him. He is the NAME in essence. It is a fact that in Sikhism, you can call him Allah, Shiva, Ram anything. Because, what you are still doing in meditation/prayer is you're referring to God (Wahe-Guru in Sikh terms), and Him as being an individual (ONE). There is no way, Guru Gobind Singh directly prayed to Shiva of Hinduism. And please, a word of caution never mention such a statement to a religious strict Sikh because they will not respond lightly.

Think of it this way. How many Sikh's call God actually God during prayer? Not any that I know, since He is referred to Wahe-Guru. Therefore, if Sikhs say they pray to GOD (in english context), does that mean they pray to the Christian God? (since the word God is used more often in Christianity). I hope you understand the point I am trying to make.

In addition, it is unfortunate that Sikh's are being considered a sect of Hinduism. Sikh's are also being considered a sect of Islam as Sufi-Islam (Sikhism). Whatever that means, I don't know, I will leave that for my muslim comrads to answer.

Futhurmore, Sikh-Hindu marriages are more frequent to the exact point ChannMahi referred to. In both our religions, we don't have defined conversions or contraints in the marriage ceremony, and the inter-faith marriages that are occuring are of abroad generations, the children born of the western countries (usually). It's bad enough to really get married out of caste (a contradiction in Sikhism, only being carried out by social/custom traditions due to Hindu influence), nevertheless get married to a Hindu or a Muslim.

I will agree with you that, Sikh's and Hindu's have shared the same soil in the sense that we were the only ones that were NOT CONVERTED by Arabs/Persians. It is a fact that, the Indians that did not forcibly convert, converted on the basis that Islam is like an ideal religion for those of lower castes (because at that time it provided a better sense of equality than of their current religion Hinduism.)

However, Muslims, Hindu's and Sikh's have shared the same soil all-together. Over half of Indian Punjab's villages are of Islamic names. My village in Punjab is called Husseinpur, it is an obvious indication that Muslims once lived there. We have to remember, Indian muslims in particular are NOT ancestors of the Arabs or Persians, but the CONVERTEE'S (if you may) of Islam. (direct proof, darker complexion muslims are obvious) They were once Hindu before, and that simply can not be denied.

Final point is. Sikhism has clear definitions of being a opposite and contrast religion from Hinduism, therefore it has no basis in being a sect of Hinduism, just for sharing the philosophy of reincarnation. (That is like saying Islam is the offspring off Christianity, because they believe in Heaven and Hell, even Zoorastrianism has a similar faith in that (the dark, and the light, good outweighing evil., etc, yet it has nothing to do with those religions.

It's time for Hindu's accept that, no matter how much they want to believe Sikh's are Hindu's, Sikh's simply are not!

  • No Sikh would argue with me on that, only Non-Sikhs would argue to that -

Arai

36

[quote]
Originally posted by arai:
**

Final point is. Sikhism has clear definitions of being a opposite and contrast religion from Hinduism,**
[/quote]

None at a philosophical level, I would say. Even mythology is same. Chitra and Gupta guard the doors of heaven and hell and Dharmaraj or Yamaraj decides about the things.

37

In Sikhism there is no such thing as Chitra, or Gupta. Only God decides everyone and anything, no intermediaries. In addition, there isn't a defined heaven or hell, but a merger into God. For example a friend gave me a good analogy of this. Consider yourself as a glass of water, when you finally merge with God is kind of pouring the glass of water into the ocean (God being the Ocean). Hell in terms of Sikhism is pretty much the cycle of reincarnation, reincarnation in a way is sort of punishment, because you're not fully enlightene, and God being the good means everything else is bad. As being Human, this is the closest you are to God, if you screw up, back through the cycles again, until you're a human once again to try again to get to God.

Arai

38

I wonder ,with such liberal defenition of hinduism for COUNTING purpose only ,there is a misconception that there are as many hindus as claimed on census.
Without any ceslestial guidlines ,or divine revelation,how can any body be considered hindu.If hinduism is to be considered a religion ,at all.
If it makes Indians happy we should all call ourself hindu,-for a price of course!!;-).I don't thnk Islam would have ny objection to a system which doesn't want you to believe in any thing just few names Hindu like & read or heard or seen on t.v. screen,ramyana,krishna,mahabharat.I dont mind beingSONAM,sometime ,i can preend to pray in front of idol,whatever,i don't believe in them so it does'nt matter any way,heck i can even bow down as in AAdab Arz hai with some creativity i'can fake it & stil be muslim!! ROFL he he he

39

sanam, dont talk shop. if you have read siri guru granth sahib or vedanta, please contribute. otherwise dont bother.

Chitra and Gupta, I remember reading somewhere. But a quote on heaven or hell is easy. 'hari apni bhagato karayi wadiayi vekhalianu! apni api kare paratiti aape sev ghalianu! hari bagata nu deyi annadu thiru ghari bahalianu! ** papiya no na deyi thiru rahani chuni narak ghori chalianu!** hari bhagata no deyi piyaru kari angu nistarianu!' this is on page 91 of sggs, siri ragu.

40

ZZ, the verse you quoted from page 91 is the first in GGS that has word "nrk"(narak) in it. I guess you ran your search and first time it hit "nrk" you jumped. To understand gurbani in GGS you have to understand the grammatical rules of gurmukhi that were employed by the Guru's to transcribe it in Gurmukhi. You are correct in pointing out the verse containing "nrk" but since you don't know the grammer of GGS you missed the meaning.

The word "narak"(nrk) is written two ways in Gurbani. "nrk"(narak) is a plural. The singular is "nrk_"(with an AunkaR under the letter kakka). It is like saying "The narak" in English while "nrk" means multiple naraks. 'nrk" in conjunction with the word "ghor" is used numerous times to mean deep pain,unrest,dukh/kashat etc. Since the word "nrk" is plural in this word it does not point to the same narak that Pandit ji scare you off.

same goes for words Naam_, chit_,sant_, sangat_,sajan_ etc etc.
The concept of reincarnation is as explained by arai if continues is considered a dukh/narak/kashat etc and is broken by reciting His naam and being one with Him after which there is no narak no surag but "sehaj anand"/"thir"/"mukti" etc.

it is good that you have interest in GGS but before you start giving fatwas on sikhs are this and that based on your internet searches,read some grammer books and Gurmukhi well to decipher the meanings.

Ram: You and Rani have counted numerous times how many times the word ram comes in GSS. WHy don't you read verses that explain the properties(gunn), characteristics of Ram(which means One who is present everywhere...Rav(m) ria....)in GGS and then compare with Ram Chandar ji of Ayodheya, you will see which Ram is being mentioned in GGS.(I will write some more on this later, I have to first verify the story of a shudra doing bhagti and Ram Chandar ji getting little mad at him).

Here is a verse by Bhagat Nam Dev ji. some food for thought.

"paaNday tumra Ramchand so aavat dekheya tha.
Ravan seti sarbar hoi, ghar ki joye gawai thi"

"mann chhod chhod bhaidN.
simar simar gobind"

If you still believe Gurus were Ram Chandar's bhagats and Sikhs are misinterpreting the GGS, you can do so.

I am not condenming someone's right to pray Ram Chandar ji or consider him The God. I will defend Hindu's right to have such belief just like my Guru Teg Bahadur did but I want my right to believe in my Ram and please don't try to politicise the gurbani of GGS.