Jump to content

caste in sikhism


Recommended Posts

What is the relevance of using Singh and Kaur as last name when Sikhism is severely divided along caste lines? Singh and Kaur were designated as last name by Guru Gobind Singh ji to remove caste from Sikhism. However, take present day Punjab. Talhan village (near Jullundhur) has showed us that if the lower castes try and back their economic empowernment by more political rights it results in riots. This is not confined to one village. In every village in Punjab the lower caste live in a separate colony.

In this context let us examine Canada where Kaur and Singh are not recognized as valid surnames for the purpose of immigration. Should we do something about it? Has anything been done about this? Wouldn't it be ineffectual to question the Canadian government about this if the very purpose of coming up with Singh and Kaur has been defeated?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Sardar Moderator Singh

This is an interesting context in which to raise the subject, however the issue of castes and surnames has been discussed many many a time.

It is hereby requested therefore in order to steer this discussion forward we consider the following elements:-

1. Immigration and use of surnames

2. When in and in what context were the names Singh and Kaur given to sikhs?

3. If the use of caste names are so wrong, why then does Guru Gobind Singh refer to himself as "Gobind Singh Asi-khalaona Sodhi-Rai" (note: Singh is present in this signature, indicating that he has taken amrit and become part of the Khalsa Dal)?

4. Furthermore in Gyani Gian Singh's account of the Amrit Sanchar of 1699, he clearly indicates that Guru Gobind Singh upon giving Amrit to the 5 Pyare, proceeds to tell them when relaying the rehit that "from this day on you are considered part of the Sodhi-Khatri clan"

5. Finally, what is the significance of Guru Ji's statement "Kshatriya ka poot ho, Bhaman ka nahi" in Krishna Avtar, Dasam Granth?

Please make reference by number to these issues when posting.

Thanking you all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You still should carry on your family name.You don't want people from the same family marrying each other.For instance, Manjit Singh Khalsa marries Tarsem Kaur Khalsa, and later they find out that they are first cousins.That is why it is good aqal to know what family each person is from.

You don't want the Sikh population to end up inbred.

A little aqal goes a long way.So do not think of getting rid of your family name and maybe sticking Khalsa on the end, that's stupidity.It isn't about false pride about your clan, but knowing each others gotra's comes in handy when marrying.No inbreeding please.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok. Some people seem to believe that if you got a certain surname you some how belong to a caste. If Surnames didnt have these thoughts of caste-labeling with surnames, then Amritdheri can still keep there surnames and then dont end up inbred. If we did marry our cousins, there will be many gentic problems.

http://www.islamonline.net/askaboutislam/d...questionID=3212

If i was Amritdheri i would still keep my Surname.

Hang onnnn. Ive just thought of something!!

When Guru Ji taken Amrit, he was named Singh. Why isnt this happening now adays?

Look at this and tell me what you think.

ok.

A Sikh child is born into a sikh family, but this child isnt born with the name Singh or Kaur but is known has a Sikh, but when he/she takes Amrit they add the name Singh or Kaur to there name, then by adding one of these names, they renouce caste but dont need to remove their surname.

I know this might not never happen.

But i think this was the way sikhs were surpose to be named.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the reply. To add to it:

1. It would be interesting to find out the reasons that the Canadian immigration department does not recognise Kaur and Singh as valid surname. It could be purely for administrative purposes. Perhaps the large number of Kaur and Singhs in the country has created confusion. I know it sounds insipid even to my own ears! I look forward to any other explanation.

2. As far as I know the name Kaur and Singh were given on the Baisakhi day when Guru Gobind Rai called for all to take the appellation of Singh. This was done to ignore the caste affiliations, which had created divisions.

5. I have always found interpretations of Dasam Granth more interesting than convincing. Whose interpretation you choose to believe is the more important question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I dont think you understand what i said, im for Surnames. But i think the Singh and Kaur naming system was forgotten?? But I know this is a wild idea. And will never take effect.

OK example.

Before Amrit

Kushinder Sandu

After Amrit

Kushinder Singh Sandu.

Maybe this was surpose to be the way we're surpose to name Amritderhi Sikhs? Maybe we forgot the nameing system?? Because Guru Ji was never called Singh from birth.

Theses name are just used for examples and are not real names. If they are then its just by chance, and these names have no link.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...