JungChamkaur Posted February 22, 2014 Report Share Posted February 22, 2014 Sat Sri Akal Everyone, I wanted to know more about Tribal identity and its relation to Sikhi. I always read that Guruji said we should abandon our tribal history and drop our Gotras for Singh. However, I am unsure about this because Guruji Himself gave a narrative of their lineage. I do think that our Gotras should not determine our caste (here I define caste as social function), but I do think that we are still supposed to be aware of it and acknowledge it and thereby our history as a peoples. Please, can the more Gurbani-educated Prahs shed some light on this matter for me? Thank You SatnaamJi 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted February 22, 2014 Report Share Posted February 22, 2014 (edited) In my opinion guru Ji was against the discrimination of other castes.For example if I'm a high caste and I'm belittling other castes because they are lower castes.This is what guru Ji did not want us to do.He did not want us to throw away caste because he would have not said Kshatri ko poot ho bhramin ko nahi if he did. I know I'm gonna get so much crap for my opinion. If anyone wants my reasons just ask nicely and ill tell y'all why I have these beliefs. Edited February 22, 2014 by Singh123456777 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny101 Posted February 22, 2014 Report Share Posted February 22, 2014 The idea behind it is not to discriminate based on caste/race/colour. I don't think anywhere the Gurus said to not be allowed to use Gotras/last names. Traditionally Sikhs used the name of their village or illaka as their last name For example Teja Singh "Samundri", Sant Sundar Singh "Bhindranwale", Gurbachan Singh "Manochahal". Using Gotras as openly as we are now doing is a recent change/trend among the Sikhs. If we all stop using our Gotras, then every Sikh man will have the last name Singh and every woman will have last name Kaur. Can you imagine trying to find someone's phone number which lakhs of people with the exact same name. I think we should go back the traditional way of our people and use the name of the village or area as the last name. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted February 22, 2014 Report Share Posted February 22, 2014 Now the hard questions come. Would you marry(including me)a different jaat? Ill give my opinion after. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JungChamkaur Posted February 22, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 22, 2014 Personally, I am already going to marry outside my jaat. My parents are ok with it. In another thread, I wrote that I dont think Guru Sahib said the line about "Brahmin ka poot na hoon" for some reasons. I may be wrong. But yes it makes sense that we dont have to discard our tribal identity, but instead are forbidden to discriminate according to it. I await answers from other users like DalSingh, NeoSingh, GTLoc, Jaikara, etc. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted February 22, 2014 Report Share Posted February 22, 2014 In my opinion guru Ji was against the discrimination of other castes.For example if I'm a high caste and I'm belittling other castes because they are lower castes.This is what guru Ji did not want us to do.He did not want us to throw away caste because he would have not said Kshatri ko poot ho bhramin ko nahi if he did. no caste should think of themsleves as superior to any other. Now the hard questions come. Would you marry(including me)a different jaat? marriage is not the only way to bring us together. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrsingh Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 (edited) Sat Sri Akal Everyone, I wanted to know more about Tribal identity and its relation to Sikhi. I always read that Guruji said we should abandon our tribal history and drop our Gotras for Singh. However, I am unsure about this because Guruji Himself gave a narrative of their lineage. I do think that our Gotras should not determine our caste (here I define caste as social function), but I do think that we are still supposed to be aware of it and acknowledge it and thereby our history as a peoples. Please, can the more Gurbani-educated Prahs shed some light on this matter for me? Thank You SatnaamJi Sikhi refutues tribal identity as an utter irrelavance and total falsehood. Vasakhi 1699 and the birth of the Khalsa Panth instruct us clearly on that. Given that Guru Sahib told us to abandon our tribal history and drop our gotra's do you think it was probable that Guru Sahib would waste time in the middle of fighting for Sarbat Da Bhala, fighting oppression, fighting for the needs of the poor and oppressed etc, etc to mention the history of his supposed lineage given that Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj continually stressed the need for "kul nash" (non-tribal identity). Please read what Dr Davinder Singh from Grand Prairie, Alberta and Global Sikh Studies has to say in his analysis of that. I believe Gurmat advises us that we should never use caste-affiliated Gotra's (though the odd geographic village based names may help avoid confusion if used without pride in brackets). Edited February 23, 2014 by mrsingh 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GtLoc Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 Sikhi refutues tribal identity as an utter irrelavance and total falsehood. Vasakhi 1699 and the birth of the Khalsa Panth instruct us clearly on that. Given that Guru Sahib told us to abandon our tribal history and drop our gotra's do you think it was probable that Guru Sahib would waste time in the middle of fighting for Sarbat Da Bhala, fighting oppression, fighting for the needs of the poor and oppressed etc, etc to mention the history of his supposed lineage given that Guru Gobind Singh Ji Maharaj continually stressed the need for "kul nash" (non-tribal identity). Please read what Dr Davinder Singh from Grand Prairie, Alberta and Global Sikh Studies has to say in his analysis of that. I believe Gurmat advises us that we should never use caste-affiliated Gotra's (though the odd geographic village based names may help avoid confusion if used without pride in brackets). Please don't insult dasam bani. There is a difference between caste and varna. Caste in Punjabi means tribe, it is a social unit and Christianity has a goal of destroying it. You should learn how people were before 1947 and 1849 before talking about some utopian classless society. We are not communists 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 You should learn how people were before 1947 and 1849 before talking about some utopian classless society. We are not communists We aren't all peasants either, subscribing to an ideology that takes Sikh society into rural backwardness. Sikh social order IS based on ideas of a classless society. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny101 Posted February 23, 2014 Report Share Posted February 23, 2014 Sikh social order IS based on ideas of a classless society. Very true. Ideally the Sikh social order is a classless society where one is not discriminated based on differences of Jaat-Paat/Nasal/Ameeri-Gareebi. These are all man made social constructs. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JungChamkaur Posted February 24, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 So is a Sikh classless society one without Gots? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny101 Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 (edited) So is a Sikh classless society one without Gots? I don't think one has to give up their last name. It is one's thinking that should change. I know Amritdhari Sikhs who have had inter caste marriages, but still use their last name. It's not practical for 25 million people to all use the last name Singh. If one finds Got as unSikh, then one can always use the name of their pind or illaka as their last name. Edited February 24, 2014 by Jonny101 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaikaara Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 There were misls like Ramgarhia , Ahluwalia so its not just about dropping the last name ..as Singh123456777 pointed out belittleing others is against Sikhi. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 There were misls like Ramgarhia , Ahluwalia so its not just about dropping the last name ..as Singh123456777 pointed out belittleing others is against Sikhi. You've just unwittingly reinforced the point. Ramgarhia was NOT a got, it was a name given to Jassa Singh for defending the fort of Ramgarh. Same with Alhuwaliah, it refers to the fact that that Jassa came from the village Alhu. Too many people like to play down the BLATANT way in which all the tribal, jaat paat bukwaas is unquestionably the worst cause of disunity in the panth. It splits people up in villages, in Gurdwaras, in politics. So to try and make out like it is some harmless heritage artifact is to stick your own head up your backside and ignore all the truth around you. But we know apnay are famous for their denial mentality, so maybe we shouldn't be surprised that so many morons are doing this here? Whilst the older generation doing this can be partially excused/explained by their lack of education and outright penduness - I find it shocking that some of the younger people here, who have some education at least, are parroting this backward shite. Shame on you. Go back to Hinduism where you belong perhaps? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 Sikh social order IS based on ideas of a classless society. can a classless society ever exist? Has one ever existed anywhere? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted February 24, 2014 Report Share Posted February 24, 2014 can a classless society ever exist? Has one ever existed anywhere? Maybe people haven't tried hard enough and have repeatedly suffered under Napoleonic pigs, of the Animal Farm type variety. Any Sikh who truly believes in the underpinnings of his faith shouldn't be aiming for less. If none has ever existed before, maybe we are here to be the first. It's in striving that greatness is achieved. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 hmmm, i'm just thinking of the other lot who claimed that once they had broken free of the HIndu domination in india, and Hindu/sikh domination in panjab, they would be living as a classless society, where no-one was any greater/better/more important than the other. of course this dream only lasted 24 years, the last few years of those 24, being extremely hostile. even now in Pakistan (in case you hadn't guessed) the politics does, and always did, revolve around castes and clans, and lingual fraternity's. even islam isn't a unifying factor anymore. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chatanga1 Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 Any Sikh who truly believes in the underpinnings of his faith shouldn't be aiming for less. If none has ever existed before, maybe we are here to be the first. i like the sound of that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dalsingh101 Posted February 25, 2014 Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 (edited) of course this dream only lasted 24 years, the last few years of those 24, being extremely hostile. even now in Pakistan (in case you hadn't guessed) the politics does, and always did, revolve around castes and clans, and lingual fraternity's. even islam isn't a unifying factor anymore. We shouldn't be using them Abduls as any reference point towards what we can achieve. Or let their failures dampen our own aspirations. Edited February 25, 2014 by dalsingh101 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JungChamkaur Posted February 25, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 25, 2014 I think that Guru Sahibaan probably were against discrimination more than being against classification or stratification. Since the quote that I was earlier skeptical about (Hum Brahmin ka poot nahi, Kshatriya ka hoon --- sorry for not knowing the Tuk properly) is actually included in Bani, it is clear that stratification is just. Makes sense too. For, Varna are necessary for society to function. If you dont believe in this then read Plato's plagiarist work: The Republic. It is a complete ripoff of Indian society. Also, I remember coming across some Tuks in Shri Sarbloh Granth Sahibji, if I am not mistaken, about Kalyug being an age where Varnas would be composed of beings unfit for their ascribed duties/dharma. Society crumbles when Business communities/ vaishyas rule societies and leave Kshatriyas to become their industrial labor class --- this is whats happened in India. The business class has been successful in their coup and overthrown a society which was functioning pretty well until foreign rule disrupted it. Eventually, Guru Maharaj came onto Earth and re-established Satyug and this time made it the responsibility of all Varnas to contribute to the cause of defence. Being Sikh should not mean that you cannot be in a varna or caste. Its just that if we are Kshatriyas or Brahmins, we should not be discriminating against lower Varnas. The whole Mahabharat is about the emergence of Kalyug principles. Even Gramsci contests that the business class has become the ruling class and relegated other classes to mere labourers. This is the main problem. I am supporting Theocracy here but in light of the recent comments and based on my derived and potentially wrong understanding, tribal identity probably isn't bad, its just the discrimination and the ideology that an individual's tribal background should dictate his/her social function. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jonny101 Posted February 26, 2014 Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 In places like South India and else where, Christians are converting a large number of Hindus to Christianity due to the caste system. If Sikhs do not discard this evil, we will see the same thing happen to us. Already the Ravidasias who in reality are our brothers have separated. In Amritsar/Gurdaspur Christian missionaries are converting Mazhabis. This despite the fact that caste has no place in Sikhi. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted February 26, 2014 Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 In places like South India and else where, Christians are converting a large number of Hindus to Christianity due to the caste system. If Sikhs do not discard this evil, we will see the same thing happen to us. Already the Ravidasias who in reality are our brothers have separated. In Amritsar/Gurdaspur Christian missionaries are converting Mazhabis. This despite the fact that caste has no place in Sikhi.If we stop discrimination than the other caste would never ever convert.Discrimination is the problem.There is nothing wrong with calling oneself a jatt or mazhbi etc. The gurus wanted ultimate loyalty to the guru and not the caste.But did they just abolish it?For example the gurus wanted the mistris to have ultimate loyalty to the guru and not other gurus etc(the mistris have a mistri guru).You can even say the gurus promoted caste such as making the sikligars. We should be proud of our heritage of a jatt or mistri,mazhbi and so on but have loyalty to only guru ji. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JungChamkaur Posted February 26, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 Mistris, or Tharkhans or Ramgarhias, all praise Guru VishkarmaJi. There is nothing wrong with this AT ALL. Guru VishkarmaJi is not a spiritual Guru, but a professor of Architecture in India's ancient universities or Gurukuls. He was not a spiritual Guru. The 10 Gurus did not tell us to forsake our educational Gurus... although nowadays many Tharkhans have started praying to Guru VishkarmaJi, which our Gurus would probably object to. Nevertheless, Guru Vishkarmaji is the Tharkhan community's professional Guru. Likewise, Satyug Kshatriyas had different Gurus for different subjects. The Tharkhans should still respect Guru Vishkarmaji but not as a spiritual Guru because that was not his social function. Also, there is nothing wrong with giving Parnaam to Guru VishkarmaJi for anyone. Its in our culture to bow our head to elders and youngsters alike. So Gurus or professors of such high calibre deserve great respect. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Singh123456777 Posted February 26, 2014 Report Share Posted February 26, 2014 Erm no. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JungChamkaur Posted February 27, 2014 Author Report Share Posted February 27, 2014 I know for some he is more than a professional Guru. I think this is where we have a fundamental difference with his Bhagats. However, respecting him as a professional Guru does not go against Gurbani in this sense, in my own semi-educated opinion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.