I do not claim to be an expert on Sikhism, but most of my friends growing up in India were Sikh. One in particular was an avid follower of Sikh history, and based on what I remember (over the course of countless midnight discourses :)), I have to disagree with at least a couple of comments made here…
ZZ said..” In fact, one could argue that it was failure of sikhs that sikhism remained confined to Punjab and did not spread beyond.”
Arai said .. “There is not even one SIKH in the world who is Dravidian.”
Based on what I know, I would say both statements are wrong. If I recall correctly, one of the Panj Pyaares of Guru Gobind Singhji was a barber (or potter?) from Bidar, Karnataka. In fact, there is a very sizeable community of Sikhs in that area even now – and most if not all are originally Kannadas who subsequently converted. Ditto with some areas in Bihar / Orrisa. I also know one person from Kerala who is a Sikh (his great grandparents converted to Sikhism a long time back) and according to him, there is a decent-sized population of Sikhs in that state too. While these are limited, specific examples, point is everyone is talking about Sikhism being limited to Punjab and that is not true -Sikhism is definitely not confined to Punjab. It may be more popular there for obvious reasons, but it has spread elsewhere too - and I dont mean just a relocation of Punjabi Sikhs to other parts of India - I mean a grass roots acceptance of Sikhism by people from different parts of India.
Also, it would be wrong to say that the reduced popularity of Sikhsim in other parts is due to any failure of the Sikhs. In fact I would argue that one of the great points of the Sikh religion has been the absence of proselytizing activity – Sikhs have not been going around trying to convert people to their religion - all these examples I gave were of people who converted not out of force, but because they were attracted to the basic concepts of Sikhism.
Similarly, Arai is clearly wrong when he makes his blanket claim about not one Sikh in the world being Dravidian – while there are many who would argue with him on the AIT theory and Aryan / Dravidian, I really don’t want to get into that here. But I think I know what he means by the term Dravidian, and he is wrong. Sikhism has a universal appeal, and it has spread to more parts of India than even some Sikhs know or give it credit for. On a side note, Arai, I think you mean well, and the original point that you started this thread with was a very valid one, but since then you have gone on to make a lot of claims that show a somewhat limited knowledge of both Sikhism and general history. But I do agree with your basic premise that Sikhism is a separate religion and that Sikhs have a distinct identity.
The entire argument in this thread seems to have somehow gotten sidetracked into looking for a checklist of similarities / dissiliarities between Sikhism and Hinduism. I am not sure what that proves in any case. Just the fact that Sikhism has similarities with Hinduism does not make it a sect of Hinduism. I am a practicing Hindu, and my take on this is that if Sikhs feel they are a separate, distinct religion, that’s really all there is to it – I don’t see what right (or need) Hindus have to try and convince anyone otherwise. I agree with the statement I think Chann Mahi made somewhere on this thread – that the majority of Hindus in India will have no problem accepting that Sikhism is a separate, distinct religion. In my opinion, this whole issue of Sikhism being a sect of Hinduism is clearly politically motivated, though it beats me why anyone would want to persist with it, when it is clearly going nowhere.
In closing, what is surprising to me is that in all the numerous discussions of Sikhism, there has been little if any discussion of the basic concepts of this religion – rather we are all busy arrogantly fighting over who is closer to Sikhism. If we could somehow get beyond this and into the philosophy of Sikhism, you will be amazed at how beautifully simple and how universal the concepts are. Seen in that light, all these other arguments almost seem petty.
