AjeetSinghPunjabi

Would you call our moneh boys "sikhs" ?

158 posts in this topic

A basic analysis : 

If you look at most religions worldwide , it is only the core priestly class which follows the tenets of religion to fullest. The laymen are either not required or not bothered. 

Sikh gurus were of the vision that the priest and common man should have the same spiritual opportunity. For this reason, Guru Gobind Singh ji gave  5 kakkars to all of us, not just the granthi.  He gave turbans to all of us , not just the political ruler.

This is in stark contrast to both hinduism and islam.

Most hindu men don't keep uncut hair or keep tilak , even though all rishis (who wrote vedas) did have uncut hair much like sikhs, the pandits do wear bodi and tilak. Some hindu communities require boys to pierce ears (one time childhood event).

Most muslim men don't wear turban or keep beard like the prophet, even though the imams of mosques do. Islam requires boys to be circumcised (one time childhood event).

Most hindu women are still expected to wear saree, sindoor, mangalsutar and other external signs of hinduism (life long)

Most muslim women are expected to wear hijab (life long).

So , as it is in both hinduism and islam, it is men who're let off lightly when it comes to religious discipline while women do have to carry the weight with them. Women are seen as flagbearers of culture.

Also islam and hinduism both believe in mutilation of some sort as noted above.

Sikhi on the other hand is so opposed to altering god's gifts that we don't even permitted to cut our hair .

Carrying religious articles in sikhi is opposite . Men wear turbans and keep beards (life long) , while women can do eyebrows and no one cares. If a boy however cut his hair , it raises eyes. In sikh communities, men are the flagbearers of culture. 

It seems many (some?) of our boys nowadays don't bother much about it. Somewhere in the 70s, we started going down the slippery slope where our boys started shedding hairs faster than we could cope. And once a guy cut his hair , his son also wouldn't keep it , and then sikhi goes off in that lineage. 

Today, we face a horde of young sikh men who don't look sikh . They keep really short hair like models and don't wear turbans. Kada is convenient , so its always there in hand. 

But the larger question is "Is such a man sikh ?" If not, then what is he ? 

Are we ultimately going to become like other communities , where only the priests keep religious articles while laymen don't ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am also worried about the internal racism from moneh "sikh" guys and girls towards turban wearers. Have you seen what happens at gurdwara matrimonials?

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No they cannot be called Sikhs. Call them Punjabi but not Sikhs. 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guru Nanak Dev Ji didn't wear a turban? I believe documented history suggests he wore a 'seli-tioi' he also seemed to be in favour of dressing eclectically challenging the idea of uniformity? 

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sukhvirk1976 said:

I would disagree.. They not khalsa but they might be Sikh 

There are no might be Sikhs. You can either be a Sikh or not a Sikh. Choice is yours.

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Sukhvirk1976 said:

I would disagree.. They not khalsa but they might be Sikh 

Troll, you need to stop living off welfare checks and get a job.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There were so many in the sangat of guru sahib who had not take amrit. They might have eventually taken it. Like for example Bhai Nand Lal ji. A lot of his writing is were written before he took amrit. So let's not start labeling everyone. they may eventually take amrit. Some people also start putting down other jathas by saying so they do not follow puratan maryada hence they are not true gursikhs. Just worry about yourself. 

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Preeet said:

Vaheguru ji Ka Khalsa
Vaheguru ji Ki Fateh, ji

I don't think it's about being amritdhari.. I think it's about 'monehs' taking part in bujjar kurehits, hence they are not considered sikh by some. Vaheguru ji Ka Khalsa Vaheguru ji Ki Fateh

Look at this disgusting poster.  She argues on this forum to say Hindus are Sikhs but now tells us those who cut hair are not Sikhs. Even besharam people don't want to be seen with you.

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
32 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:

Look at this disgusting poster.  She argues on this forum to say Hindus are Sikhs but now tells us those who cut hair are not Sikhs. Even besharam people don't want to be seen with you.

She's quite the confused character 😂 or just a very transparent "undercover Hindu."

4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, 5akaalsingh said:

Not acknowledging Sehajdharis as Sikhs would do more harm than good. We're gonna lose demographics just because of pointless discrimination. There are lots of monas who have immense respect for Guru Granth Sahib, more than many amritdharis.

Twisting the meaning of sehajdhari will be doing more harm than good individually and collectively.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Akalifauj said:

Twisting the meaning of sehajdhari will be doing more harm than good individually and collectively.  

but hasn't it already...used to mean from non-sikh to sikh , not mona manmukh guilty of going against Guru ji's bachan.

As Christians say you cannot serve two masters (God and Mammon/maya) 

These guys need to drop the babey, murti puja, ganne, mardian masney, burre burre  and get straight with Guru ji

1 person likes this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Balkaar said:

What actual good is going to come of this question? There are 25 million Sikhs across the planet, as compared to the 1 billion+ adherents of Islam, Christianity, and Hinduism, all three of which harbor malicious designs against Gursikhi, and you actually wanna reduce the number of Sikhs even further?  

'Sikh' and 'Singh' were never even considered to be the same thing up until very recently. I'd encourage those members arguing otherwise to investigate historical accounts from the era of the Sikh confederacy/empire and base their judgement on these itihaasic facts rather than 20th century prejudices. In particular the distinction between 'Khalsa' and 'Khulasa' Sikhs. 

Just as Sikhs are being whitewashed out of the history of India, the contributions of Sehajdhari Sikhs are also being whitewashed out of the history of the qaum. 

maybe we should encourage their taking up sikhi proper, dastar and gurroop:

1. to protect our sisters, daughters, mothers from fakes

2. to maintain the trust of Guru ji and millions of ancestor who trod the path before us

3. to give something back to the community and to ensure continuity of the panth

 

for the girls :

1. to ensure our community grows and has a healthy egalatarian aspect

2. to create self-empowered gursikhs for the future

3. to create even more role models for up and coming generations

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree to an extent, teach uneducated sehajdharis Sikh values first, make sure they are entrenched, and a point will come in their lives when they cannot fail to see the value of the Khalsa lifestyle. 

But alienating them by casting aspersions on their loyalty to their Guru:

36 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

but hasn't it already...used to mean from non-sikh to sikh , not mona manmukh guilty of going against Guru ji's bachan.

As Christians say you cannot serve two masters (God and Mammon/maya) 

and guilt-tripping them with stories of our ancestors, which make them start keeping their hair out of a sense of shame or inadequacy:

21 minutes ago, jkvlondon said:

2. to maintain the trust of Guru ji and millions of ancestor who trod the path before us

are extremely counterproductive methods which will only lead to more and more people forsaking the Khalsa identity. These methods are also way too common, particularly in so-called 'Sikhi' camps, where many kids come away feeling estranged from Amritdharis whom they begin to regard as fanatics. This is very dangerous for someone in the formative years of their life. 

A lot of Amritdharis seem to be completely unaware of the psychological effect they have on non-Khalsa Sikhs. Those who wear Guru's roop, are considered to be representatives of the Guru, the way they behave has a direct impact on Guru's reputation in the eyes of the beholder. So when we get Amritdharis who are cold and exclusionary towards uninformed monaay, how could they not start believing the same about Guru, and drift further and further away from him? 

If we show unconditional pyaar to our sehajdhari brothers and sisters, they will begin to feel pyaar for us, and by direct implication, for the Guru and his bana/rehat. I don't blame monaay for the extent of hair-cutting in the qaum. The onus is on the Khalsa, as the steward of the Sikh nation, to rectify this.

Edited by Balkaar
4 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Balkaar said:

I agree to an extent, teach the more uneducated sehajdharis Sikh values first, make sure they are entrenched, and a point will come in their lives when they cannot fail to see the value of the Khalsa lifestyle. 

But alienating them by casting aspersions on their loyalty to their Guru:

and guilt-tripping them with stories of our ancestors, which make them start keeping their hair out of a sense of shame or of inadequacy:

Are extremely counterproductive methods which will only lead to more and more people forsaking the Khalsa identity. These methods are way too common, particularly in so-called 'Sikhi' camps, where many kids come away feeling estranged from Amritdharis whom they now begin to regard as fanatics. 

A lot of Amritdharis seem to be completely unaware of the psychological effect they have on non-Khalsa Sikhs. Those who wear Guru's roop, are considered to be representatives of the Guru, the way they behave has a direct impact on Guru's reputation in the eyes of the beholder. So when we get Amritdharis who are cold and exclusionary towards uninformed monaay, how could they not start believing the same about Guru, and drift further and further away from him? 

If we show unconditional pyaar to our sehajdhari brothers and sisters, they will begin to feel pyaar for us, and by direct implication, for the Guru and his bana/rehat. I don't blame monaay for the extent of hair-cutting in the qaum. The onus is on the Khalsa to act, as the steward of the Sikh nation. 

since when is it guilt tripping someone to show them the lmmense love that gursikhs through ages showed towards their future generations.

why shouldn't we expect them to honour the meaning of sikh in full , show allegiance and not by tatooing khandey on their arms but by looking out for their own whereever they are 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Balkaar said:

What actual good is going to come of this question? There are 25 million Sikhs across the planet, as compared to the 1 billion+ adherents of Islam, Christianity, and Hinduism, all three of which harbor malicious designs against Gursikhi, and you actually wanna reduce the number of Sikhs even further.

'Sikh' and 'Singh' were never even considered to be the same thing up until very recently. Those arguing otherwise should investigate historical accounts from the era of the Sikh confederacy/empire and base their judgement on these itihaasic facts rather than 20th century prejudices. In particular the distinction between 'Khalsa' and 'Khulasa' Sikhs. 

Just as Sikhs are being whitewashed out of the history of India, the contributions of Sehajdhari Sikhs are also being whitewashed out of the history of the qaum. 

This question was raised by me just to invite discussion on how we can face the issue that our kaum is facing , namely the apostasy which is just as big a challenge in our "homeland" punjab for us if not more than drugs ! 

You just turn on the punjabi channel and see the environment of punjab. 

IIM amritsar was recently launched and in their batch photo, of 30 young men, I could barely see 2 turbaned ones. Where is our kaum heading to ?

I have never hinted at alienating or guilt-tripping sikhs who cut their hair 

I have always said Khalsa is a panth in sikhi , much like a subset . There could be sikhs who're not khalsa . IMHO, if you believe in 10 guru sahibs and truly understand their message and believe in one god, then you're a sikh ! 

 

The guilt-trip camp was quite famous back in the 90s when we were kids . I always felt it made patit youth even more disinterested in sikhi , and those who were inspired, their inspirations were short lived because inspirations driven by fear are not the proper type.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, 5akaalsingh said:

Not acknowledging Sehajdharis as Sikhs would do more harm than good. We're gonna lose demographics just because of pointless discrimination. There are lots of monas who have immense respect for Guru Granth Sahib, more than many amritdharis.

So finally some sikhs admit that we're losing a demographic war. 

Whether it's medieval battles or modern silent battles in democracies , demography is necessary for any community to survive. 

Heck ! even the two words sound same : "Demo"cracy and "Demo"graphy.

Democracy favors people who're majority.

No one , esp modern politicians , is going to care you fed homeless people on sundays , that you're extra nice with all the free food in langar for poor , how your religion believes in defending others even at cost of your own life.

All they care for is whether you can vote for them. Then you could be the community which produces most of modern day terrorists, rally in public square asking the PM to be decapitated and bring your no-go sharia zones and you will still have an entire section of media and politics (lefties) to cater to you and pamper you. 

No matter how much we hate the muslims , they're waging a very successful one in pretty much everywhere.

Even now that ramzan is going, I am constantly bombarded with media reports on how politicians are going to iftar parties . Why do these politicians rarely come to langar halls ? and why iftar parties are so common ?

Why in India "minority" means "muslim" for politicians when infact sikhs are a much smaller minority .

Why ?? because vote bank , because numbers. And then you tell a sikh about how we should have more kids and see how he scoffs your idea and runs away 

2 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Moneh boys can be called dudes, guys, fellas,  lads.

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!


Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.


Sign In Now