nbf12345

Thank you so much for your kind replies. If I could ask a further question in regards to the idea of the Khalsa? In modern Sikhism, do they essentially serve as a core of people who, having taken amrit, maintain the strict ideals of Sikhism as a sort of service to the Panth as a whole? Does this reconcile with the foundation of the Khalsa by Guru Gobind Singh Dev ji? Was it always intended to be a select group of Sikhs? Or did the Guru intend for all Sikhs to follow the way of the Khalsa, or perhaps be amritdhari in other words? And was it a later date that sehajdhari's emerged as an alternative level of Sikhism? I know that's a very simple analysis of a complex issue, but I'm ignorant of the historical development and what Guru Gobind Singh's intentions were. Thanks so much! Andrew.

Thank you so much for your reply. I guess if I could start off, I'm just trying to wrap my head around some terminology, which I think as an outsider I might not be understanding the subtleties of. I wonder if anyone had any opinions if my thoughts on these words are incorrect, or perhaps not quite on the right track: Panth - As I understand it, is the Panth simply the global community of all Sikhs? Khalsa - This seems trickier, I understand it's historical creation under Guru Gobind Singh Dev ji. But what does it mean today, do you say someone IS Khalsa? Is A Khalsa? Follows Khalsa? Not all Sikh's are associated with this word assumedly. Does it mean simply maintaining the Five K's? Does it mean a community of all Sikh's who follow certain ways of living? Sahajdhari vs. Amritdhari - Is anyone who has not been initiated as an Amritdhari automatically a Sahajdhari? Can a Sahajdhari express their Sikhism in any manner? It it necessary for a man to wear a turban and go unshaven for example? Keshdhari - In regards to the above two terms, what exactly does Keshdhari mean? Quam - This one is tricky, is it perhaps the concept of some sort of physical nation of Sikhs? As opposed to a religious Panth? Anyway! That's a start! Thanks so much for reading, Andrew.

Good Evening and Sat Sri Akaal, I hope I'm not intruding somewhere I'm not welcome, but I was hoping there perhaps may be some members who would be willing to engage in a dialogue with me in regards to the multitude of questions I have on the history and religion of Sikhism? Let me introduce myself first. My name is Andrew, I was born in Liverpool, England, but currently reside in Worcester, Massachusetts. I attend graduate school for history in Boston. I was raised as a Roman Catholic, but am without doubt an apostate, as I have rejected faith from my life. That said, I have an enormous interest in Sikhism inspired by long conversations with a Sikh coworker, and indeed have a stack of about twenty books on Sikh history scattered across the table next to me as I'm currently writing an historiographical paper on the Sikh Diaspora for one of my classes. I have the most incredible respect for Sikhism, indeed of all the world's religions it seems the most soundly constructed in equality, love and righteousness. But as I say, as I lack faith personally I am not looking for a religious experience. Rather, I was wondering if anyone would like to help me with a polite but frank discourse on the aspects of Sikhism which so fascinate me yet elude my understanding. As I think only someone within Sikhism can offer a true perspective on so many of the issues of the curious about. Again, there's nothing for anyone to gain from this other than helping someone reach a greater understanding of the religion. But, if only would care to talk to me, please let me know! I would be happy to talk to anyone, and hopefully I have enough understanding of Sikhism to be able to engage with people on a level on which I am least familiar with the terminology and basic concepts involved. Thank you kindly for reading, and have a wonderful evening, Andrew.