Ovoxod wrote:Hello there,
I'm a amritdhari sikh, originally born in a christian family in a small country in Europe. I converted two years ago because of the death of my cousin who was a sikh and before the tragic accident he made me promise to visit gurdwara one day. It was all quite fine before I went for a trip to England and met some sikhs there.
So basically people were really mean to me - saying that I'm "white" and I cannot be a sikh (even accusing me of lying) and one women even said that I can convert back to christianity because no sikh man would ever marry me.. i wanted to visit gurdwara there but they didnt want to let me in.. To be honest, Im not even that white, I have dark hair and darker skin, but nevertheless what really shocked me was that people really didnt respect me as a sikh.. Only because I was not from Punkab but Europe.
I just wanted to share that with you all. I really do have mixed feelings now. I feel like this religion is absolutely perfect for me and it really helped me to connect with Waheguru but at the same time I dont feel very welcomed in it by other people.
It all really makes me sad. :(
Since you are a Sikh so must be knowing the origin and history of Sikhism. Sikhism despite being a reformist religion in India could not spread outside small Punjab state of today's India because of the same reasons what you have yourself encountered and experienced.
IJJSingh wrote:I humbly disagree with Romesh ji's view. I believe that his conclusion doesn't jibe well with human experience. Reformist views and positive role models do play a part in expanding a religion but this part is very small. Reformist agenda and role models have more influence in improving the health of a religion for people who are already members; I believe its affect on attracting new conversions is overblown. Religions have spread primarily because of state and economic influence. If you study expansion of all non-pagan traditions (Buddhism, Christianity, Islam, etc.) they all expanded through brutality and state sponsorship. It's not just conversion but even continuation of a religion has little to do with reformist agenda and fair mindedness of the co-religionists. If it were so, why would aboriginals in North and South America continue to stick so doggedly to Christianity? Why would slavery and post-slavery era blacks facing brutal discrimination in the Southern United States tend to be more religious than their cousins elsewhere defies all logic. History of Sikhism in India is no different than other world religions. At the time of the Gurus, there were Sikhs all over India, but these populations did not endure. Behavior of Punjabis had little impact on these populations outside Punjab. Sikhism spread in Punjab because of the Sikh rule. Proportionally, the Sikh population was the highest at the time of Ranjit Singh. Sikh population started declining with the decline of Sikh power. The religion remained confined to Punjab because Sikh power never expanded outside Punjab.
So what's the purpose of my statements above? I am not being an apologist for the bad behavior of Punjabis. Neither am I suggesting that we should not strive to be the best we can be. My point is that there is a tribal (anthropological) face of a religion and then there is spiritual face of a religion. We have to decide for ourselves what we want out of a religion. If you are looking for social acceptance and comfort of a tribe, then unless you are a Jatt living in shrinking areas in Punjab, Sikhism may not be a good choice. If you are after spirituality, then Sikhism has a lot to offer and in return you may have to put up with some nastiness from some Sikh and non-Sikh tribals.
bachittar wrote:I am afraid I have to admit that Punjabis do tend to discriminate, may be not all, but the majority do. It is their way to assert their so called superiority. I
Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 2 guests