Jump to content

Is Sikhism really hijacked by Jattism ?


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

3 hours ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

You said brahmins have created the current reservation order in india ! 

Infact brahmans despise it the most ! Because the current reservation policy is totally against upper castes, including brahmans . 

Let us first admit we have failed . I don't want to beat dead our community over this but considering how good sikhi is in theory but still lagging a little behind in practice. Although we still have good elements like langar , open gurudwaras for all and so on . We just need to move a little further . 

Thanks 

I don't see any Brahmins who are ready to burn the Manusmriti texts or ready to give up the privileges which come with taking the best and most influential jobs.  I don't believe that we as Sikhs have failed but it is the system which is interfering with us that is the cause of our problems.  You cannot relieve the symptoms of an illness without locating the cause of it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

Anyways, coming to point , Is Sikhi really totally dominated by Jatts

Yes, to an extent. To this day many Jatts seem to erroneously think they are the 'true' Sikhs, and ironically that they follow original unaltered Sikhi. As someone from a Jatt background I have witnessed many conversations between the oldies which encapsulate the above.

Example convo:

Oldie 1: Oh did you know Mr A Singhs son is getting married to Mr B Singhs daughter, but they're *insert non-Jatt caste here*?

Oldie 2: Really? What can you do, kids these days. Chalo *insert non-Jatt caste here* call themselves Sikhs too, they go to the Gurdwara, and I'm sure they do lots of seva. Plus so and so was a *insert non-Jatt surname* too.

Both: Sikhi doesn't have caste really though but your Jaat is your Jaat HANNA?! Non-Jatt castes have non-Sikh traditions though, we don't.

Both: Eh vi gal sai ah.

Etc, etc etc. I'm sure we all get the picture.

When I was younger I was baffled by these convos and what these comments meant, and it wasn't until I was older that I realised that this is what casteism was. When I joined in I would ask what was meant and say things along the lines of "but we know they're quite obviously Sikh, why are you saying it in such a way as to imply they are not Sikh just because they aren't Jatt?" To which their reply would be...well nothing, or a sentence which just trails off and stops midway through.

It's so deeply ingrained into the Jatt psyche. However, we can't put all the blame on Jatts though, others castes can be just as guilty.

It's not just Sikhs who practise casteism btw, it extends to many Pakistani Punjabis too (mostly the Jatt ones) and to other Indian Muslim communities such as Khatris. I know of many who would absolutely not accept people of different castes for their kids.

 

Anyway here's who I believe is truly responsible for this caste nonsense:

 

Lol

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Ranjeet01 said:

Human beings like many other species are organised into hierarchies. 

The caste system is a hierarchy, you can destroy this hierarchy but it will be replaced by another hierarchy. 

Humans have always discriminated amongst each other for various reasons.If it is not based on caste it will be something else. 

There is a phemenon happening with Gurdwarae I hear from relatives in California.

Gurdwarae aren't based in commitees where one is Jatts dominated or Tharkhan dominated. 

They are seperated by what is happening locally. There are different gurdwarae based on if you are a "trucker" or a "doctor". 

I understand what you're saying. But we have to go against our primal urges and rise our base behaviour. Thats what our gurus taught us too. The occupation based gurudwara news is a totally hilarious thing . It just adds more weight to the argument that Sikhs / punjabis tend to see gurudwaras as more of a social get-together and community center thing than center of preaching and spirituality . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, proactive said:

Khalsa college was founded by the manager of Sri Nankana Sahib management committee  in the mid-1930s mainly as a college where the lower castes that Dr Ambedkar had promised would convert to Sikhism would be taught. We need to beware when accepting the anti-Akali dal trope that the Akalis or Jat leaders refused to admit Dr Ambedkar to Sikhi. This is a lie that has gained currency especially after 1984 as a way of showing that the Akali Dal has never had the best interests of the Sikhs. Dr Ambedkar did show an inclination to become a Sikh and it was because of this that Sardar Narain Singh the manager of the Sri Nankana Sahib estate management committee was chosen to go to Bombay and set up a college for the lower caste converts. If the Akalis really did not have lower caste Sikhs then why did they set up missionary centres to convert low caste Hindus to Sikhism in places like Hapur, Aligarh and even places in the south such as Mysore? The SGPC even set up a printing press in Bombay ostensibly for the use of Dr Ambedkar to print his newspaper and books. It goes to the credit of Dr Ambedkar that he returned all the money spent on the printing press when he did not convert to Sikhism. 

There might be other reasons for why he did not convert to Sikhism but to blame the SGPC or Akali Dal or 'Jats' is clearly false. 

With regard to Sikhism being hijacked by Jats that is not the case at all. Do Jats place Bhagat Dhanna Jat as a Guru equivalent to the Gurus as some others castes have done lately with Bhagats of their background? That would be hijacking a religion. Has any Jat Sikh ever expressed disappointment that none of the Gurus belonged to a Jat background? 

The fact is that Sikhs from a Jat background are majority of Sikhs and hence they control most of the institutions of the Panth which is natural given that we use democratic means to select our leaders. If the Jat Sikhs were say, 2% of the Sikh population and they had the influence and leadership positions they have now ( just as Brahmins have in Hindusm) then it would fair to say that they have hijacked Sikhism. In places like Delhi where the number of Jat Sikhs among the Sikh population are miniscule there are no Jat Sikhs in leadership positions. 

Thanks. This post makes much sense.

I too had a feeling that the reason Ambedkar wasn't so actively encouraged by Akalis and SGPC to become a sikh is because somewhere in psyche, due to our past, we still have the haunting fear of hindus again trying to subvert sikhi . Fear of assimilation is a valid fear in our minds. 

Perhaps SGPC saw ambedkar with distrust too. After all he was a "hindu" before conversion to buddhism. Perhaps the SGPC feared losing the hard-earned grip our sikh institutions and gurudwaras to perhaps brahminical proxies like Ambedkar.

TOO BAD that we later on realized 70 yrs later that Ambedkar was a genuine guy and definitely not a hindutva proxy. If we had his followers converted , my own city mumbai would have had a massive sikh community in itself. 

I have also heard similar 90 lakh kabir panthis were turned off when they wanted to take amrit. But i guess such sudden surge of neo-converts always raises suspicion from the sikhs in power (SGPC, akalis, etc) because of two possible reasons

1) The SGPC, Akalis fear losing their chair to neo-converts. Thus they're greedy.

2) They're genuinely suspicious about these new guys, in the interest of panth.

I will give the SGPC, Akalis the benefit of doubt and give them number (2). 

 

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.

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


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use