Is Sikhism a religion

[tva prasad]

Google's definition of religion is as follows:

religion

rɪˈlɪdʒ(ə)n/

noun

 

1. the belief in and worship of a superhuman controlling power, especially a personal God or gods.

   "ideas about the relationship between science and religion"

   synonyms:

   faith, belief, divinity, worship, creed, teaching, doctrine, theology; More

   • a particular system of faith and worship.

     plural noun: religions

     "the world's great religions"
   • a pursuit or interest followed with great devotion.

     "consumerism is the new religion"

      

     IMHO, I think that eastern "religions", as they are described by most, are not religions but rather a way of living or dharam. Be it Buddhism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Jainism, etc. are based around philosophy, dharam, enlightenment, etc. 

      

     "Buddhism is based on dharma where the goal is to liberate oneself from the suffering of the Earth. It was initiated in the 5th century BCE by the famous Siddhartha Gautama. Hinduism is based around the beliefs of dharma, samsara, karma, and moksha. It is one of the oldest religions in the world and bases its teachings around the Bhagavad Gita. Sikism is the belief of preaching to enlightenment based on honesty, giving, and chanting for God. Jainism is based around the need to be pure, free of violence in all aspects of life."

     "Some of the religions that are practiced in the Western world include Christianity, Catholicism, Puritanism, Protestantism, Judaism, and Evangelicalism. The locations these religions are practiced depends upon their historical impact by followers of particular religions. Western religions are not driven so much by certain principles and ideals, rather everyday good and bad behavior to reach Heaven."

     http://www.differencebetween.net/miscellaneous/religion-miscellaneous/difference-between-eastern-religions-and-western-religions/ 

      

     Therefore, it can be concluded that eastern "religions" are not as much "religions", in the western sense, they are more a way of living. Whereas, western religions are qualified to be called religions as they are based around faith and worship rather than philosophy and dharam. It is worth noting that in India at least, "religion" is called "dharam" (piety or duty) and "panth" (path). For the lack of a better word, these are translated to "religion" in English. Hence, Sikhism, along with other eastern dharams are not religions, in the western sense at least. 

[das]

Religion: In an ideal world, it is a school (having its rules/regulations/rituals) where one studies Spirituality (subject). In other words, a religion is just a way to understand (based upon one's preference/environment/background/culture etc.) the Spirituality.

But unfortunately these days, the religion has been converted into a mere box in which we try to fit our definition of God. Actually, all religions tend to follow the same path which eventually leads to a separate dedicated religion.

[chatanga1]

On 9/23/2018 at 8:30 PM, KB31 said:

I mean, can you 100% say that the last 8 gurus, what they molded Sikhi into,  that guru Nanak would approve all of it. 

Can't beleive that no-one has picked this up. The poster saying that he doesn't beleive that Guru Nanak would approve of some of the things the last 8 gurus did.

 

Admins asleep again.

@sarabatam @amardeep @Xylitol @Parchand

[amardeep]

15 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

Can't beleive that no-one has picked this up. The poster saying that he doesn't beleive that Guru Nanak would approve of some of the things the last 8 gurus did.

 

Admins asleep again.

@sarabatam @amardeep @Xylitol @Parchand

I did notice it but thought it was such a stupid statement that it did'n deserve a response.

[Jageera]

On 9/23/2018 at 5:19 PM, paapiman said:

From a perspective, Sikhism is a highly organized religion with strict codes of conduct governing the daily activities of its adherents.

It is a strict monotheist religion, but the concept of monotheism is different from that in Islam or Judaism.

Satguru Sri Guru Nanak Dev jee Maharaaj (currently in the form of Gurbani) is the incarnation of the Almighty God and is supposed to be worshiped.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

Yes Sikhism is a religion.Those not born into it should convert into Sikhi before claiming to be Sikhs. After 84 and all the attempts to absorb Sikhi it's crucial that we have our own institutions and system to separate us from other faiths.

I disagree that Guru Nanak was Waheguru himself.Waheguru doesn't take birth and never dies.What that takes birth and dies is never the almighty himself.I doubt the almighty is able to take a human form.The energy is too big for that.A human body wouldn't be able to sustain that energy. Guru Nanak must have been a part of Waheguru sent by Waheguru himself to start a third path in Punjab that would spread worldwide.I think rather than empty worship a Sikh should realize and experience Waheguru.

[paapiman]

13 hours ago, Jageera said:

I disagree that Guru Nanak was Waheguru himself.Waheguru doesn't take birth and never dies.What that takes birth and dies is never the almighty himself.I doubt the almighty is able to take a human form.The energy is too big for that.A human body wouldn't be able to sustain that energy. Guru Nanak must have been a part of Waheguru sent by Waheguru himself to start a third path in Punjab that would spread worldwide.I think rather than empty worship a Sikh should realize and experience Waheguru.

There is enough evidence in Gurbani to prove that Satguru Sri Guru Nanak Dev jee Maharaaj is the incarnation of the one Almighty God.

Please have a look below:

 

Bhul chuk maaf

 

[tva prasad]

On 10/10/2018 at 7:02 AM, Jageera said:

I disagree that Guru Nanak was Waheguru himself.Waheguru doesn't take birth and never dies.What that takes birth and dies is never the almighty himself.I doubt the almighty is able to take a human form.The energy is too big for that.A human body wouldn't be able to sustain that energy. Guru Nanak must have been a part of Waheguru sent by Waheguru himself to start a third path in Punjab that would spread worldwide.I think rather than empty worship a Sikh should realize and experience Waheguru

Are you sure that Guru Nanak actually took birth and died? In reality, death and birth are non-existent one who knows this neither takes birth nor dies. The Almighty lord who is ever present can take any form he wishes. Our bodies sustain energy of the almighty, this is known as Atma (is Atma really different from Parmatma?). At the end of the day this creation is an illusion by God, hence, God can do what he wishes as he controls the creation. Through worship alone one comes to experience him. With devotional worship one sheds ego and experiences the creator, knowing this world to be false thus forsaking it, s/he unites with Parmatama. Therefore, worship should not be forsaken, however, devotion and love should be present within ones heart if s/he desires to obtain God. 

[paapiman]

On 9/24/2018 at 12:37 AM, amardeep said:

With the Singh Sabha you start to get Sikhism with its sola scriptura (out with dasam Granth) one institution (only a gurdwara could qualify) one rahit, one form of symbols

It is not a must for a religion (based on modern understanding) to have only one scripture, one code of conduct, etc, or is it?

For example, a religion could have 3 primary texts, 10 code of conducts, various symbols, multiple dress codes, etc.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

[harsharan000]

On 10/9/2018 at 9:02 PM, Jageera said:

I disagree that Guru Nanak was Waheguru himself.Waheguru doesn't take birth and never dies.What that takes birth and dies is never the almighty himself.I doubt the almighty is able to take a human form.The energy is too big for that.A human body wouldn't be able to sustain that energy. Guru Nanak must have been a part of Waheguru sent by Waheguru himself to start a third path in Punjab that would spread worldwide.I think rather than empty worship a Sikh should realize and experience Waheguru.

The Bani very clearly and beautifully in simple words says: Aapay Satgur, Aapay Har, Aapay mel milawe.

They Guru Sahiban, Gurmukh Jan, Bhagat Jan, Brahmgyani, are the very manifestation of Akal Purukh. If a particle of that Anhad Bani, Jot, or even Dhun, can take a human form as a living being, or even any living form, what makes you think, He can not come at our level to explain His own mysteries, of which we dumb human beings can not even remotely ever in our wildest dreams can come to know about it.

You see, there where He is, only He is, and any number of jeevas who go there, not by their efforts or merits, but by His apaar kirpa, just merge and bcome with Him without any distinction.

We are not talking about gods, godesses, devis, devtays, where even after so many austerities jap or tap, the devotee of that spiritual entity, be it in Swarg or Baikunth, remain as individual entities as such for a time being, then again, both at dfferent times have to find their way.

It is only in Wahiguru, where the jeeva by His kirpa alone, becomes blended in one for ever with Him, not otherwise.

You see, no gods, no angels, nobody can know anything about Him, unless He himself wants to disclose Himself to anyone. And if it has to be so, it has to be by a Gurmukh, otherwsie we are all lost souls.

At other place as the Bani says : Bhoolay marg jinay batayaa, aisaa Gur wadbhagee paaya. 

For the whole world is totally absorbed in their own manmat of the devotion towards Him, but it is only when we come in contact with His Bhagat Jan, that we become aware that, the real path of reuniting ourselves with Him, is only by boarding on Nam jahaaz, which  we  can only know, when He himself comes at our level, to speak in our understable terms, otherwise He is subtler than the subtlest of the beings.

Nobody can be forced to believe anything, but if we look at our Guru Sahiban, and pay focused attention to the Bani, we can come to the conclusion, that He can assume a human form, just to reveal us His myteries, even then, His real form is the Shabad in action in that Gurmukh, in that Bhagat, in that Brahmgyani, for that Shabad is a supraconsciousness  force, or call it energy, but never ever it can be the body, for the body of any being, is made of the 5 insentient tattwas.

If the physicall form of Guru Jee was the true one, it had come as such, right from the beginning, and not be born as an infant, who grows into an adult then pass on the old age ...  It is the Truth of Nam or Shabad which works in that particular body, for a certain period of time, then the body decays, and the body of  the 5 elements gets dissolved into their origin, but the Shabad Guru, manifested in that body,  returns or goes wherever They think fit, to carry their work of  a boatman, which takes the jeevas from the mahabhavsagar, to the shore of Sach Khand.

So you see, the body is not the Guru, and it has never been,  but is just a vehicle, to get expressed,  to us the limited and dumb human beings in our own terms.

Other thing is, our consciouss level is very low, so we see only the limited, but not the power or Jot in that  physical form of Guru Sahiban.

Otherwise why would the Bani say : Jeh sau chandaa ugveh, suraj charey hazar, bin Satgur ghor andhaar.

Moreover within this fragile limited human form, He Himself resides, otherwise why would it be called Har mandir?  You see, He is Infinite yet subtle. We relate big with space, that is why our sense fails to understand Him, you see, within us, He the Lord, and all the kainaat exists,  if that was physical how could the holy scriptures say that He is within us, isn´t it?

We are weak and confused, but the Guru Sahiban  are the manifestation  of Him at our level, otherwise He is apaar and alakh, for us limited beings.

Stay blessed.

 

Sat Sree Akal.

 

 

[amardeep]

4 hours ago, paapiman said:

It is not a must for a religion (based on modern understanding) to have only one scripture, one code of conduct, etc, or is it?

For example, a religion could have 3 primary texts, 10 code of conducts, various symbols, multiple dress codes, etc.

 

Bhul chuk maaf

According to the big Abrahamic religion there should be one scripture primarily.  Ie bible or Quran. I would argue the modern Sikh obsession in some circles with sola scriptura comes from a middle eastern perspective of what does it mean to be a religion. 

[tva prasad]

2 hours ago, amardeep said:

I would argue the modern Sikh obsession in some circles with sola scriptura comes from a middle eastern perspective of what does it mean to be a religion. 

I think it is a western influence. Missionaries that are influenced by western science, "logic", etc. always promote single scripture, one rehit maryada, and stuff. They don't understand the importance of sampardas, etc. 

[amardeep]

7 hours ago, tva prasad said:

I think it is a western influence. Missionaries that are influenced by western science, "logic", etc. always promote single scripture, one rehit maryada, and stuff. They don't understand the importance of sampardas, etc. 

Exactly. When I said middle eastern I meant the religions originating from there 

[angy15]

On 10/13/2018 at 6:26 AM, tva prasad said:

I think it is a western influence. Missionaries that are influenced by western science, "logic", etc. always promote single scripture, one rehit maryada, and stuff. They don't understand the importance of sampardas, etc. 

Sikhi which we see today is not what our Gurus taught .Its distorted ,corrupted and Missionary and other Scholars are trying to clean up the mess.

Yes they are  Samparadas  worst nightmare.They are going to make Sampardas non existent. 

Saparadas have different ideology which is vedantic influenced .They interpret the meaning of gurbani using Vedantic  dictionary .Infact when we compare the Samparads interpretation and Hindu practices  their is so much similarities .Many of Hindu scholar in India call it fifth Ved .Thats  the reason we can see so many rituals in our Gurudwaras.

 

[chatanga1]

3 hours ago, angy15 said:

Yes they are  Samparadas  worst nightmare.They are going to make Sampardas non existent.

Your bestest favourite dream is being kissed by ghaghri isn’t it? You must have loved that time(s) !

[Soulfinder]

8 hours ago, chatanga1 said:

Your bestest favourite dream is being kissed by ghaghri isn’t it? You must have loved that time(s) !

Lol thats why veer ji nkj is promoting this flith

 

[tva prasad]

20 hours ago, angy15 said:

Sikhi which we see today is not what our Gurus taught .Its distorted ,corrupted and Missionary and other Scholars are trying to clean up the mess.

Yes they are  Samparadas  worst nightmare.They are going to make Sampardas non existent. 

Saparadas have different ideology which is vedantic influenced .They interpret the meaning of gurbani using Vedantic  dictionary .Infact when we compare the Samparads interpretation and Hindu practices  their is so much similarities .Many of Hindu scholar in India call it fifth Ved .Thats  the reason we can see so many rituals in our Gurudwaras.

 

You are right in saying that Sikhi has been distorted but these missionaries and "scholars" (that don't know sh1t) are making things worse.

Sampardas are keeping the authentic Sikhi alive. 

There is nothing wrong with rituals, however there is something wrong with us. Don't be lead into believing whatever by Ghagri, discover the truth yourself. It is human nature to resist, but one should surrender. 

[amardeep]

22 hours ago, angy15 said:

Sikhi which we see today is not what our Gurus taught .Its distorted ,corrupted and Missionary and other Scholars are trying to clean up the mess.

Yes they are  Samparadas  worst nightmare.They are going to make Sampardas non existent. 

Saparadas have different ideology which is vedantic influenced .They interpret the meaning of gurbani using Vedantic  dictionary .Infact when we compare the Samparads interpretation and Hindu practices  their is so much similarities .Many of Hindu scholar in India call it fifth Ved .Thats  the reason we can see so many rituals in our Gurudwaras.

 

Angy can you provide some examples of the wrong arths of the sampradayas ? And also the right ones

[angy15]

19 hours ago, amardeep said:

Angy can you provide some examples of the wrong arths of the sampradayas ? And also the right ones

Veerji do you believe that our Gurus had redefined common words  that were used in their time .

[tva prasad]

51 minutes ago, angy15 said:

Veerji do you believe that our Gurus had redefined common words  that were used in their time .

Poets are known to use words in an artful way. One word can mean more than one thing. Also, poetry as a whole can have more than one meaning. 

[amardeep]

2 hours ago, angy15 said:

Veerji do you believe that our Gurus had redefined common words  that were used in their time .

No I don’t think so. They added more depth and layers to many words but they didn change the meaning of words such that red suddenly meant blue and tree suddenly meant sun. Nothing of that sort happened 

Edited November 15, 2018 by amardeep

[angy15]

7 hours ago, amardeep said:

They added more depth and layers to many words but they didn change the meaning of words such that red suddenly meant blue and tree suddenly meant sun

 ONE Fundamental Rule of SGGS is that meaning of words should be found from SGGS and they should be consistent throughout and words with different meaning should be understood contextually .

Redefining doesn't means Red becomes blue or tree means sun. Redefining means understanding words in context of the shabad the (Bhav) and not just literal meanings .

Like For Eg

Maaning as per Gurbani

NAAM ->  Godly virtues .

TAAP: Spiritual deeds

Amrit : Gurbani

On 11/14/2018 at 1:38 PM, tva prasad said:

missionaries and "scholars" (that don't know sh1t) are making things worse.

 I  dont agree with you .They  try to interpret Gurbani by using Gurbani .

 

[amardeep]

Yes. We agree. Gurbani adds new layers to existing Words. But it does'nt cancel old meanings. If that was the case, Gurbani would have been followed by a dictionary so that one knows the new meanings of the Words.

"ONE Fundamental Rule of SGGS is all meaning of words should be found from SGGS"  - > when was this rule made and where do you have this rule from?

By the way, could you please provide one example of wrong arths from the samprdayas and also provide the real arth ?

[amardeep]

In terms of vedant - Gurbani is replete with Words that originate from the sophisticated terminology of Vedanta. Jeev, Brahm, Atma, Maya, Prakrit, Budh, maya, karma, sansara, mukti, chit are all vedantic terms. If one wants to know what the meaning of these Words are, you will have to look up the meanings in vedantic writings and literature. That's what the samprdayas have done since the 18th Century.  If you believe these Words have a different meaning in Gurbani then please provide some examples of how so.

[angy15]

Sorry my apologies   amendment  to the below statement  done in orginal post

1 hour ago, angy15 said:

ONE Fundamental Rule of SGGS is all meaning of words should be found from SGGS.They appear as rejected or Redefined

 

 

[angy15]

On 11/15/2018 at 6:22 PM, amardeep said:

ONE Fundamental Rule of SGGS is all meaning of words should be found from SGGS"  - > when was this rule made and where do you have this rule from? 

If we read and understand we will get to know their is rule working you may call it principle.

Just like Prof Sahib Singh found out their is a Grammar working throughout .

To understand Rule/Principle  lets see two different meaning of word Jup  in Gurbani

Accepted form

Jup : Imbibe/Understand (Vicharna)

ਆਜੁ ਕਾਲਿ ਮਰਿ ਜਾਈਐ ਪ੍ਰਾਣੀ ਹਰਿ ਜਪੁ ਜਪਿ ਰਿਦੈ ਧਿਆਈ ਹੇ ॥੫॥

O mortal, thou shall die today or tomorrow.imbibe the philosophy of Guru  in your  heart.

Rejected form

ਜਪੁ ਤਪੁ ਕਰਿ ਕਰਿ ਸੰਜਮ ਥਾਕੀ ਹਠਿ ਨਿਗ੍ਰਹਿ ਨਹੀ ਪਾਈਐ ॥
Jap ṯap kar kar sanjam thākī haṯẖ nigrahi nahī pā▫ī▫ai.
Practicing intensive meditation, chanting and self-discipline, people have grown weary; stubbornly practicing these rituals, they still have not found Him.

Understanding/Meaning  of the word Jup is coming  from SGGS itself and  the Rule(Accepted/Rejected)  for the word Jup will be consistent throughout SGGS.