Jump to content

can you be a sikh without taking amrit?


Guest sikh
 Share

Recommended Posts

based on what i've researched and read i dont think you can be a sikh without amrit or at the very least following rehat word for word but rhat tells you to take amrit as well so what's the sangat's views?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Siri Guru Granth Sahib Ji: 
 

ਗੁਰ ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਕਾ ਜੋ ਸਿਖੁ ਅਖਾਏ ਸੁ ਭਲਕੇ ਉਠਿ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਧਿਆਵੈ ॥

One who calls himself a Sikh of the Guru the True Guru shall rise in the early morning hours and meditate on the Lord's Name.

ਉਦਮੁ ਕਰੇ ਭਲਕੇ ਪਰਭਾਤੀ ਇਸਨਾਨੁ ਕਰੇ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਸਰਿ ਨਾਵੈ ॥

Upon arising early in the morning, he is to bathe, and cleanse himself in the pool of nectar.

ਉਪਦੇਸਿ ਗੁਰੂ ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਜਪੁ ਜਾਪੈ ਸਭਿ ਕਿਲਵਿਖ ਪਾਪ ਦੋਖ ਲਹਿ ਜਾਵੈ ॥

Following the Instructions of the Guru, he is to chant the Name of the Lord, Har, Har. All sins, misdeeds and negativity shall be erased.

ਫਿਰਿ ਚੜੈ ਦਿਵਸੁ ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ ਗਾਵੈ ਬਹਦਿਆ ਉਠਦਿਆ ਹਰਿ ਨਾਮੁ ਧਿਆਵੈ ॥

Then, at the rising of the sun, he is to sing Gurbani; whether sitting down or standing up, he is to meditate on the Lord's Name.

ਜੋ ਸਾਸਿ ਗਿਰਾਸਿ ਧਿਆਏ ਮੇਰਾ ਹਰਿ ਹਰਿ ਸੋ ਗੁਰਸਿਖੁ ਗੁਰੂ ਮਨਿ ਭਾਵੈ ॥

One who meditates on my Lord, Har, Har, with every breath and every morsel of food - that GurSikh becomes pleasing to the Guru's Mind.

ਜਿਸ ਨੋ ਦਇਆਲੁ ਹੋਵੈ ਮੇਰਾ ਸੁਆਮੀ ਤਿਸੁ ਗੁਰਸਿਖ ਗੁਰੂ ਉਪਦੇਸੁ ਸੁਣਾਵੈ ॥

That person, unto whom my Lord and Master is kind and compassionate - upon that GurSikh, the Guru's Teachings are bestowed.

ਜਨੁ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਧੂੜਿ ਮੰਗੈ ਤਿਸੁ ਗੁਰਸਿਖ ਕੀ ਜੋ ਆਪਿ ਜਪੈ ਅਵਰਹ ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਾਵੈ ॥੨॥

Servant Nanak begs for the dust of the feet of that GurSikh, who himself chants the Naam, and inspires others to chant it. ||2||

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Guest sikh said:

based on what i've researched and read i dont think you can be a sikh without amrit or at the very least following rehat word for word but rhat tells you to take amrit as well so what's the sangat's views?

 

VJKK VJKF

You can still follow rehat word for word and if you do that then it's very close to living an Amritdhari life. If you follow/read rehat you'll see the first rehat stated under "The definition of a Sikh" says as the last point that you should be baptised by the tenth Guru. When you are baptised you are part of the Khalsa but the thing is the Khalsa is Sikhi. There is no difference between the Khalsa and Sikhi. Sikhi is the religion but Khalsa is the way of life that a Sikh leads and so you can't have one without the other. It doesn't really make any sense to have one without the other, and if we don't lead the way of life that a Khalsa leads through rehat then how can we call ourselves Sikh? For some reason, we've totally got the two completely separate when infact they are the same thing. As a follower of the Sikh religion, one follows the Khalsa way of life. They are not different in anyway. We sell Sikh short nowadays. Yes, Amrit is so important but being a Sikh (true Sikh) is no less of a blessing and to reep the full fruit of being a Sikh, Amrit is how to start your journey of Sikhi. They go hand-in-hand.  In Se Kineya, Baba Harnam Singh Ji goes infront of Guru Granth Sahib Ji and asks them "Who's ardaas do you listen to, an Amritdhari Sikh's or a Rehatvaan Sikh's?" and Guru Gobind Singh Ji did darshan to them and said that I listen to both ardaas because they follow the rehat and live their lives according to the way of Gurmat and not Manmat. That is what rehat is: Gurmat. But if we don't follow rehat then it's hard to really have our ardaas considered. Using this, we can conclude that following rehat (way of a Khalsa) alone is as powerful as the Amrit given to us (living as a Sikh). Panj Payre will never, ever tell you not to follow rehat after you receive Amrit because they are both as important as each other and in this same way you can only call yourself a Sikh when you follow the way of a Khalsa. What Amrit does, and why it separates one from the standard Rehatvaan Sikh, is that there is no doubt that you will be given mukti (given you follow the rest of rehat) but as just a Rehatvaan Sikh there is never the guarantee, it's a 50/50 chance. Sometimes this is hard to accept or understand but from what I have understood, this is what I believe the answer to be Ji.

To be defined as something we must meet the criteria of that "something" and if we don't then we can't truly say we belong to the group we are trying to define ourselves by. If I say I am a businessman but don't own a business, can I say I am a businessman? If I say I am a brother but I don't have any siblings, can I say I am a brother? In the same way, if I have no given my head to my Guru and received Amrit and follow the way of. Khalsa, can I say I'm a Sikh of the Guru? I'm not saying anyone is better than anyone else, all I'm saying is without amrit, we can't be initiated into the Khalsa, which is what a Sikh way of living is and if we aren't part of the Khalsa and that way of living then we can't be defined as a Sikh, as per what our religion says a Sikh is, not me Ji. 

 Yes, obviously if someone asked us what religion we are then we would say Sikh because we were born into Sikhi. But if they followed that up by asking us how closely do we follow our religion then only really Khalsa and full Rehat Sikhs could say they do and therefore by definition they would be the full embodiment of what a Sikh is.

In addition, many would query that if the rehat says that you must be baptised by the tenth Guru to be called a Sikh, why can you still be defined as a Sikh if you haven't been given Amrit by Guru Gobind Singh Ji but you follow total rehat? This is because Sikhi is in pure definition, the path of the learner. Sikhi - notice I don't take the "i" off because Sikhi and a Sikh aren't the same thing - is the religion but Sikh is the one who follows all the teachings of the religion. Amrit is the first step of a Sikh. BUT, you must crawl before you run and the crawling stage is what a Sikh or someone who has just started walking the path of Sikhi does before Amrit. After Amrit, you run forever and ever. No-one gets their GCSES straight away. Before then, they are still learning and practising, like you do at school from Year 7-11 before you get your GCSES. So you must learn first and whilst you are learning, you are a learner (a Sikh). Yes, Amrit is so important but the work before is important as well. Nowadays, we sell Amrit so short even though it is Amolak (priceless). Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh Ji would make people sit through 48 hour long Akhand Paaths before allowing them to be given Amrit. If you walked into a lecture theatre to find there is no-one teaching then how will you learn? You must learn with the aim to qualify. Sikhi is a school where you learn but you don't get your GCSES (GCSES) until you've done the revision from Year 7-11 first (learning the way of a Khalsa). The revision (learning the way of a Khalsa/Sikh) is what makes you gain the GCSES (Amrit) and you can't gain GCSES (Amrit) without revision (learning the way of a Khalsa/Sikh) and without revision  (learning the way of a Khalsa/Sikh) you can't gain any GCSES (Amrit). This is why, in the purest definition, the school of Sikhi makes you learn about the way of a Khalsa through what their way of life and daily discipline is and what it means to be a Khalsa/a Sikh. When you learn, Amrit is what makes you become that Khalsa and just apply that knowledge you've learnt before (Year 7-11) to your own life so you become the Khalsa (attain your GCSES). That's why Amrit is as important as Rehat. A Sikh is a learner but a Khalsa is someone who applies that to their daily life by oath to their Guru. Mukti, spiritual progress etc are all a different topic. 

Idiots like me cannot truly talk about Amrit and Sikhi. However I would definitely recommend you check out this thread as it is answered much better than my answer. http://sikhsangat.com/index.php?/topic/44423-question-on-sikh-khalsa/. Sorry about the different font sizes; I was writing in my phone notes and transferring them to here and added bits and pieces whilst on the website as well. I have made so, so many mistakes writing and so please forgive me. Maaf Karna Saadhsangat Ji.

Vaheguru Ji.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Singh2017 said:

Bhai Sahib Bhai Randhir Singh Ji would make people sit through 48 hour long Akhand Paaths before allowing them to be given Amrit. If you walked into a lecture theatre to find there is no-one teaching then how will you learn? You must learn with the aim to qualify. 

Singhs in the Khalsa would be more strict then just sitting through 48 hour akhand paat.

They would recite bani even practising shastar. Sitting down for paat for 48 hours is not really compatible with Khalsa rehit, a Singhs need to practise shastar vidiya and be tyaar bar tyaar. Doing something like horse riding or shikaar is also important. Just listening to paat is more of a sehajdhari or sant matt lifestyle. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Haridas

disagree with you.

if you have faith in Guruji, you're a sikh.  it doesn't matter whether you have taken pesh or not.

rehit is a guideline.  but if a person conforms with principles of Gurbani, that is the thing. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Singh2017 said:

To be defined as something we must meet the criteria of that "something" and if we don't then we can't truly say we belong to the group we are trying to define ourselves by. If I say I am a businessman but don't own a business, can I say I am a businessman? If I say I am a brother but I don't have any siblings, can I say I am a brother? In the same way, if I have no given my head to my Guru and received Amrit and follow the way of.

Sikh is not khalsa.. 

You can be a sikh without taking Amrit.. 

Furthermore the definition of a sikh as defined by rehit maryada has been defined by politicians.. 

I define myself as a sikh whether someone else thinks I am is irrelevant.. Just as their are many amritdhari people I have met who I  feel don't espouse sikhi despite taking Amrit.. Mool mantar defines the essence of sikhi. Why do we need additional texts edited by politicians to tell us what it means 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest MrLynx
On Thursday, March 08, 2018 at 10:49 PM, Sukhvirk1976 said:

 

I define myself as a sikh whether someone else thinks I am is irrelevant..  

 

Nicely put ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/03/2018 at 3:43 PM, ipledgeblue said:

Singhs in the Khalsa would be more strict then just sitting through 48 hour akhand paat.

They would recite bani even practising shastar. Sitting down for paat for 48 hours is not really compatible with Khalsa rehit, a Singhs need to practise shastar vidiya and be tyaar bar tyaar. Doing something like horse riding or shikaar is also important. Just listening to paat is more of a sehajdhari or sant matt lifestyle. 

so you are saying listening to your Guru ji nonstop without going for a break  is nothing , that it has no value in sounding out those who have true bhao ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 3/8/2018 at 2:49 PM, Sukhvirk1976 said:

I define myself as a sikh whether someone else thinks I am is irrelevant..

You are not what you identify as, just as I cant just identify as an Apache Attack Helicopter as my gender. There is a reason why the Guru himself put the definition of a "Sikh" in Gurbani, the Guru also excommunicated people and no longer declared them his Sikhs, so your argument comes from a point of ego and is not inline with Gurbani or History. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. 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

  • 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