From SikhiWiki
(Redirected from Talk:Sikhism)
Jump to navigationJump to search


'GurMat', in todays' context can be understood as 'the best ONE IDEA' out of 'all' available based on rational & objective considerations.

The very defination of the term Sikh in SatGurBani Lines

gur satgur ka jo.....

clearly covers the modren day understanding. Here....

  • term 'gur' refers to all the IDEAs
  • term 'satgur' doubtlessly means the best of all IDEAs.

A sikh has to rationally & objectively consider all the avilable options & then go for the best.

'Sikhism' appears to be the closest best translation of the Bani & Punjabi language term 'Sikhi'

Renaming this page is a positive & progressive GurMat effort. Let us Sikhs Keep it up!!

If we Sikhs say 'GOD is ONE' then religion HAS to be ONE.

GurMat approves only ONE religion.


Bahuta nahin bolna..... It is easier said in Bani / Punjabi

  • Sikhi alias Learnism alias SIKHISM
--User:Mutia 23:03, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

PS:There is yet another TRUTH about Crafting & Sharing of TRUE IDEAs...

SatGur sevan aapna sy virly sansaar.... There won't be very many.

Let us Sikhs keep looking for GurSikhdas (jo 2ees" gursiKwa niv niv laga pai jeoo) . That is what our Great Gurus spent their lives on, so that we live on, on, on & on.......> --Mutia 23:32, 19 April 2007 (EDT)

Must be in "common" language and in summary form

These additions make the article too complex for most people. The most popular articles are for "common" use and need to be in simple everyday language. The following is too complex to follow and I wonder if they add greatly to the article. Please discuss below:

- to engage in selfless service (Sewa) & to become a relentless contributor to society (read Humanity) and help build a loving community life confined not only to Sikh Society but to Humanity as a whole.

A Khalsa true to his name & Gurbani will not be satisfied here & deep down in his heart will feel offended for not having used the words 'humanities living in tis universe & universes beyond' for plane & lastless term 'humanity' used in the above para.

Meaning of the the term 'contribution' here is no way confined to money or material, in fact the spirit of initiation into Sikh faith itself has to begin with by contributing one's head to Guru & God in one daily through blissfull three hours of the day.

The commitment to the spirit of Sharing, in Gurbani terminology 'offering willfully'("...fir kee aggy rakhiy..."'..what is the best gift..') one's head ( bowing with utmost humility before Guru, God & one's own self and offer nuthing but one's Head to the only true & cause, i. e. TRUTH (God) itself & truthful living through the day ahead.

As far as faith in sharing aspect of Sikhism is concerned, a True Sikh has no business to sleep through the True time of the day. If such a Sikh does offend & decides to cheat God (his 'ownself' to begin with & extending to the entire humanity), he is in for trouble. His head, which should have been gifted to 'God & Guru' alias Humanity , need to be chopped off since such a person has no right to be alive.

Philosopher & Saint-Soldier Saikh Fareed (read true 'IDOL of TRUTH'/ Bani ) / 'God in human form' is no way off with his verdict for the offence of sleeping through the only True Time of the day. 'Sharing Part' of a Sikh's persona has yet to be accounted for. Lo & behold! he ordains...

Let this useless head be used for cooking the day's meal of ailing, exploited & downto roden 'Have Nots' of the humanity. God's ways of metting out justice can not be comprehended and argued about. Sayth nanak in his only language SatGurBani....

  • to begin with fir kee aggy rakhiy jit dissy drbaar ?
    • Amrit vela sach nau vadiai veechaar
  • kiv sachiara hoviy kiv kudyy tutty paal ?
    • hukm razai challna Nanak likhia naal

From the spiritual perspective, A Sikh possesses nothing except for 'His own self' & God(read mumanity) with attributes. Only th A Sikh becomes a  ; (Wand kay shakna)

use of words ending in -ism

the phrase "the isms" is used as a collective derogatory term to lump together the radical social reform movements (such as slavery abolitionism, feminism, alcohol prohibitionism, Fourierism, pacifism, early socialism, communism, nazism, .) and various spiritual or religious movements considered non-mainstream by the standards of the time (such as Transcendentalism, spiritualism or "spirit rapping", Mormonism, quoted (from wikipedia)

in the US -ism, don't know about UK, is tagged as a derogatory to many words. Here it serves as a little literary grenade tagged to a word. When i see a word tagged with -ism, bells of negativity go off in my head, guess i'm perhaps too well trained by its literary history like one of Pavloff's kutta's.

i see some people using the word Sikhi, and some using the word Sikhism , just wanted to make you aware of the history of the suffix -ism. The Nazi-ism use of the venerated 'Su vas tikka' has all but ended its use outside of Asia.Allenwalla 10:18, 22 October 2007 (EDT)

It was long ago during the British Raj that some english writers tagged -ism to Hinduism, Jainism, Sikhism, Judaism and Budhism referring to them as inferior religions to their own. You certainly do not see it tagged to Christianity, Islam, or the Jewish religions, unless some western reporter, speaking of the Taliban and other salafist sects, writes Islamism meaning fanaticism. as i see the people of india getting rid of the B. Raj titles like Victoria station vs. Shivaji, Mumbai vs. Bombay, Madras vs. Chennai, Marine Drive vs. Netaji S. C. Bose Marg, etc. i wonder if…

Thanks for this information. However, I find this intriguing because - What about these words? - Judaism, professionalism, pluralism, organism, naturalism, moralism, monotheism, liberalism, heroism, multiracialism, etc - I don't think these words portray a negative image. What do the Americans thinks of these words, I wonder? Many thanks, Hari Singh 16:52, 23 October 2007 (EDT)
Guess my early training in religion was very conservative, Judaism of course was thought of negatively in much of the world, as the Early Catholic church held the Jews responsible for the killing of Jesus. All jews were along with Muslims expelled from Spain in Columbus's days. Today AHMADINEJAD says that all the Jews should be destroyed, funny because it was his ancesteral rulers of Persia who saved the Jews from death when he freed them in Bagdad and paid for their return to Israel and for the rebuilding of their temple on which now sits the Dome of the Rock.

The Pope only got to apoligising to the Jews for the Catholic church not speaking out when the Nazis were killing so many. And the rural farmers of the south, what is considered the religious right, were/ some are still, of the opinion similar to Mullah Omar that only religion (theirs) should be taught to their children and no organism, naturalism, moralism, liberalism or scientific terms should be included, some more extreme sects even believe women should not be educated though those are rather rare. Can only speak for myself and as i said you Sarbjeet and my wife have made me relook at the ending -ism.

Did Guru Nanak Dev Ji or other 9th Gurus ever mentioned in Guru Granth Sahib that they are God's son?

Not son of God: The Gurus were not in the Christian sense “Sons of God”. Sikhism says all humans are the children of God and by deduction, God is mother/father.

I wanna know if Guru Nanak Dev Ji or other 9th gurus ever said that we are GOD'S son to this world. DId Gurus said they where Messanger of GOD?

And did Guru Nanak dev Ji said.. That Jesus is not son of god if so do is that mentioned in Guru Granth Sahib?

Reply ^^^

No Gurus haven't said that we are son of god and you would reach to god through us. Guru ji's gave us shabad guru if you would read it out it have way of life, how to live. he told us the way to live like they live. They called god not only their father but everything. "Mahakaal Rakhwaar hamaro", tu mero pita tu mero mata,

About Jesus nothing is said directly in guru granth sahib, but if he said everyone is child of god then what jesus and what us?? (Lucky 14:14, 30 June 2009 (UTC))

Revelation in Sikhism

I was wondering if we should add some content on Sikhism being a revealed religion, rather than man-made ?

There are numerous verses in Guru Granth Sahib that support this aspect.

Any Thoughts ? How should we go about this ? Voyager (talk) 03:00, 9 November 2015 (CST)

Khalsa Ji, now that there is an article on "Revelation in Sikhism", I am wondering if we should link this main Sikhism article to that. For instance, at the end of the first paragraph, we can add the sentence "Sikhism is a revealed religion" and link to the said article. Kindly advise if there are concerns or better alternatives.
Also, in the first sentence, I believe it should state 15th century as well (and not just 16th 17th). I am assuming there is no issue in making this change.
Regards Voyager (talk) 21:41, 16 November 2015 (CST)