Slavery In Sikhism

[Mr Sardar]

[REMOVED]

Edited December 10, 2015 by sarbatdapala

[Kaljug]

Is a Sikh allowed to have a slave at all? If so would there be rehat which may stated- also would we consider a mai(maid) house servant that many rich apni keep in India allowed or compared to slavery- There are some cases in India where some Singhs rape there women servants what would be the considerations of such an act under khalsa ruling saying if khalsa raj is in order.

No, Sikhi does not allow slavery. Members of the Khalsa Panth have one Mother and one Father. Who could enslave their own brother or sister?

There is a vast difference between a slave and hired help.

What's with the recent topics such as this one about slavery and the other about paedophilia? Are these issues that your new sullay friends are raising as part of their dawah bullshit?

K.

[SURYADEV]

Rather than looking to some supposed rehat maryada for do's and dont's on everything under the sun why not simply use common sense? Dharmic faiths dont have rule books telling us what is allowed and what isn't ( As in the Abrahamic faiths). We have been given basic principles to guide us through life - one of them being DAYA. We should live our life in accordance with these principles.

If you live in the UK just take a look at the faujis who slave away on building sites for a mere £35 per day. Or if you live in Panjab take a look at the baiyas who are treated like slaves in the fields or thier wives in the kitchens.

These are the same SIkhs who will be running/living in the Khalsa Raj, though they need to be educated on the principles that underpin the Sikh/Indic/Dharmic culture.

Edited December 31, 2010 by jattboot

[shaheediyan]

Jattboot, sorry for being pedantic, but have a look at the laws of Manu. You will find them very much comparable to Abrahamic faiths. Strict laws governed all aspects of life even in Sri Ram Chandras time. Here is an interesting read to give you a taster. http://www.mukto-mona.com/Articles/avijit/slavery_hinduism.htm

[Mr Sardar]

Alot has to do with me thinking about how Maharaja Ranjit Singh's rule really worked mate I got no intrest in converting (besides kaljug if I was a Sikh who wanted to convert insulting me probably would lead me to converting because you just alienated me more) but I am intrested more in how Ranjit singh pulled misls together plus how he combined people of so many religions, regions, faiths and countries together- Maharaja Ranjit is said to have violate alot of rehat they say he commited pollogamy, hookay, mujras so I was thinking he must have had slaves. How Ranjit singh even was able to sit with sardar ud-din and have established an empire ontop of people who contradict his religion. Even today there are pakistanis who have so much sikh influence because after they start studying there religion they change so much, the stuff in there religion is very different to there culture- Was Maharaja Ranjit Singh actually planning on converting all these people to Sikhism slowly- by first giving the values and qualities of Sikhi and later inserting the religious label or where they always like this just now going into crazy stuff. If such a Raj comes into power again what will be the bigger difference. At present moment akal takht is under to much influence from Badal and central goverment. I find it strange how the british's divide and conquer really played so much into all of our communities till this day even amongst sikhs with caste difference and with muslims with all the sects how they destroyed there ottoman empire messed with there religion and people the same thing is happening now- and as we youths are rediscovering sikhi we are undoing alot of that but ancient prejudice remains. Additionally history shows how intolerant christians and muslims really were there was no room for justice and human rights we have now pursuit of capital punishment of infidelity existed Guru Nanak's travels have effected the world sikhi really does show in every religion if you look close enough because the ideas Guru Nanak presented of establishing tolerance were unique for his time-pretty much slavery was practiced heavily by abrahamic religions but I was thinking if Guru Nanak taught against this and if this has had an effect on other religions in terms of re-interpreting there religions to emphasise that. If we can understand the thinking of Maharaja Ranjit singh from a political stand point we could easily destroy some of the problems that exist between Sikh jathas uniting perhaps everyone on the basis of simran.

India's dharma established whole caste system so slavery would have been normal for hindus even with muslims but Sikhism really pushed for equality any tuk of bani which may go against that. Besides a Khalistan such mimicking Maharaja ranjit singh's raj would easily be made if we had control of Akal takht if the orders of 5 takhts had effect no one would care about central goverment, if the akal takht has the protection of nihang jathas something like enforcing amritsar as a religious city is easy to ban alcohol and meat would be easy have the nihang jatha policing all of punjab- the punjab police could be made powerless if enough Sikhs would stand with akal takht- might makes right. The biggest issue right now is the money laundering and fraud taking place within sgpc where the sangats money is not going into proper parcharak and education of gianis, most raagis and gianis comming into western countries are no where near an international level of preaching a religion many can not speak english and refuse to claiming it to be sacreligious when all Guru sahibs where literate in many languages wrote shabads in many and preached in many languages- the language barrier is effecting a loss of youths away from the entrie religion- this modern world demands the bare minimum that an individual knows the bare minimums of a religion where even elders do not even know what sikhism is and to the most knowledgeable sikhs discuss unknown rehat and scholary work on internet forums.

Edited January 1, 2011 by sarbatdapala

[amardeep]

From what i've read the Sikhs during the times of the Gurus never took prisoners of war and sold/used them as slaves afterwards as was very common among the turks. From that i would induce that slavery is forbidden, however I dont see anything wrong in having a maid if he/she is paid well and treated with respect.

There is a chapter on slavery in the prem sumarag. I've read it a long time ago and it resembled more of a contract between an employee and his employer than what you normally associate with slavery (whip beatings, foul treatment, sexual abuse etc).

Edited January 1, 2011 by amardeep

[Mr Sardar]

I am seeing alot of posts recently on prem sumarag what is it? Who wrote it? What is it about? Where is it available? Is it translated into English?

[amardeep]

Its the longest Rehitnama in all sikh accounts and has 2 chapters on how to govern a state.

http://www.sikhiwiki.org/index.php/Prem_Sumarag_Granth

do a search here on the forum, it has been discussed widely. No one knows who the author is but I believe it was written during the period 1700-1730 due to its lack of hindu god worship which became prominent in Sikh litterature from 1740 and onwards.

Its written like the Quran with God speaking to mankind "I, the Supreme Being, created mankind and send the Gurus to bring liberation to mankind. Their words have not been obeyed and tyranny continues to exits. Is anything hidden from me, I who dwell in each and every heart? I hereby declare the rehit to be followed in order to secure release in this life"

Edited January 1, 2011 by amardeep

[Mr Sardar]

actually quran is not even writen in first person such as I so that it can not be compared in that contrast but it says the prem sumarag is anti islamic and anti women - there are posts on the internet which say that nihangs would make muslim converts prove there dedication to sikhi by eating pork and the stance of anti-islam was further taken with bore teath in nihang dastar. This maybe written by a nihang singh are there any references to bhang in the granth? Also the nitnem listed is quite different to that which is given nowadays by maryada it seems more like nihang maryada. Maybe akali phoola singh wrote it- "I akal(i)"? The stage of monarchy may refer to ranjit singh or maybe someone before akali phoola singh who was given this granth to conduct this.

Edited January 2, 2011 by sarbatdapala

[Guest zulu]

a there are posts on the internet which say that nihangs would make muslim converts prove there dedication to sikhi by eating pork and the stance of anti-islam was further taken with bore teath in nihang dastar.

Regarding that, a old post I posted once on SS.....

There is another point of view about Shingaar mentioned in Amandeep Madra and Parmjit Singh's 'Siques Tigers or Thieves' - they make mention of practices observed by Polier "that would now be abhorrent" - where muslim 'converts' "are made to wear a boar's tusk as an amulet" they state these practices have no doctrinal roots and are unorthodox and could be a way of testing new recruits loyalty.They also quote Du perron and his claim that "senior Siks give them (muslim converts) food to eat, and all that they eat is stirred with a tooth of a wild boar"

(Siques,Tigers or Thieves - Palgrave Macmillan 2004 - introduction pgxxxii )

The authors stress this is all highly unusual and has not survived into modern times - they also make the point that the eating of pork and the tusks may just be a by-product of hunting wild boar.

[Mr Sardar]

I am proposing that perhaps these unorthodox practices maybe in prem sumarag as sikhiwiki says there anti-islamic elements just a brainstorm on maybe who could have written that granth- Guru gobind singh had alot of respect for other religions- maybe one of the misls wrote it.

Edited January 2, 2011 by sarbatdapala

[amardeep]

There are 2 lines out of 120 PAGES that degrade women saying not to trust them, and maybe 4 lines degrading muslims.

Comparing this huge rehitnama to the other rehitnama materials we have which mostly consists of 1-5 pages where caste discrimination and devi worship is approved, i would say the prem sumarag is the least controversial rehitnama.

I dont have the panjabi text so i dont know how the wording is, but in the translation it sounds like its God speaking to mankind.

Waht do you mean that the Quran is not written like God speaking to mankind?

[Mr Sardar]

I agree with not trusting women out of bad experience, also chitarpakhian from dasamgranth draws same conclusions. What are the anti-islamic things?

Okay take the first passage of the quran

In the name of Allah , the Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful.

[All] praise is [due] to Allah , Lord of the worlds -

The Entirely Merciful, the Especially Merciful,

Sovereign of the Day of Recompense.

It is You we worship and You we ask for help.

Guide us to the straight path -

The path of those upon whom You have bestowed favor, not of those who have evoked [Your] anger or of those who are astray.

Quran Surat Al-Fātiĥah (The Opener)

Now that does work with Sikhi and if you look at it, it is not 1st person.

I remember coming across a website which once mentioned that one of the surahs of the quran was written by someone else and incomparated to the quran just like how some saloks of bani come from bhagats and bhatta. It would be interesting to know how any writer of a scripture actually has the divine revelation in the first place and if we in our own bhagti could have it to produce something with naad.

Edited January 4, 2011 by sarbatdapala

[amardeep]

Lol yeah but the remaining 113 chapters are God speaking to mankind. Surat Al Fatiha is a prayer to God

[Mr Sardar]

Okay this is abit scary

And those who believe and do righteous deeds and believe in what has been sent down upon Muhammad - and it is the truth from their Lord - He will remove from them their misdeeds and amend their condition.

That is because those who disbelieve follow falsehood, and those who believe follow the truth from their Lord. Thus does Allah present to the people their comparisons.

So when you meet those who disbelieve [in battle], strike [their] necks until, when you have inflicted slaughter upon them, then secure their bonds, and either [confer] favor afterwards or ransom [them] until the war lays down its burdens. That [is the command]. And if Allah had willed, He could have taken vengeance upon them [Himself], but [He ordered armed struggle] to test some of you by means of others. And those who are killed in the cause of Allah - never will He waste their deeds. He will guide them and amend their condition

Surat Muĥammad 47.1

That may explain why baba deep singh head was cut off.

another translation for surat muhammad 47.4 is

Muhsin Khan

So, when you meet (in fight Jihad in Allah's Cause), those who disbelieve smite at their necks till when you have killed and wounded many of them, then bind a bond firmly (on them, i.e. take them as captives). Thereafter (is the time) either for generosity (i.e. free them without ransom), or ransom (according to what benefits Islam), until the war lays down its burden. Thus [you are ordered by Allah to continue in carrying out Jihad against the disbelievers till they embrace Islam (i.e. are saved from the punishment in the Hell-fire) or at least come under your protection], but if it had been Allah's Will, He Himself could certainly have punished them (without you). But (He lets you fight), in order to test you, some with others. But those who are killed in the Way of Allah, He will never let their deeds be lost,

Do you think Maharaja Ranjit Singh was trying to convert muslims-Pakistanis have so much Sikh influence? Baba Deep Singh translated maharaj saroop into arabic and sent them to iraq are there any remaining or anyone still doing this sewa?

Edited January 4, 2011 by sarbatdapala