Page 8 of 21

Re: Khalistan, a reality or a shambles?

Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 12:31 am
by suji singh
Khalistan, a reality or a shambles?

Answer: Shambles.

Accept it and move on, do not chase empty dreams. If you insist, address the following:

1. Specifically define Khalistan: Total area, boundaries, people, political structure, and economic structure.

2. If you can do step 1 above, hold a referendum.

I am hoping this will throw a bucket of cold water on this empty discussion.

My father was an Amritdhari Sikh. While I consider myself a sikh (Sikh?). This has not extinguished my love for people of different race or religion. As a professor here in the US, I have taught African-Americans, White Americans, Hispanics, and international students. This has immensely enriched my life vs. what it would have been if I was limited by country.

Indian diversity makes it into a wonderful place to live. One can enjoy Hinduism, Budhism, Sikhism, Islam, and so on, the best from each. Case in point, the living Guru for Sikhs, SGSS, includes writings of sages from all these religious points of view.

To make progress, Sikh need to shun petty politics and replace it with genuine commitment to education.













S

Re: Khalistan, a reality or a shambles?

Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 1:24 pm
by VeeruS
rayjay,

If you are only concerned about homeland for Sikhs, then today's Punjab is pretty much homeland for Sikhs. Democracy is a lot better for an average person today than it would in a Sikh, Muslims or Hindu majority state.

In a Sikh state for example, all preferences would be given to Sikh with uncut hair and weird. In a state based on any religion, religious fanatics would take over, whether it would be a Hindu, Sikh or Muslim state .

Of course, you wouldn't want to live among Talibans, would you? There is actually called Punjabi Taliban. Plus, you would be next door to Afghanistan. All of those terrorists crossing the border to Pakistan today would be entering your Punjab and spreading terrorism. They would be shooting a fourteen-year-old girl for going to school or killing become they failed cover themselves entirely in burka.

No civilized Punjabi would want to live in this kind of state or country.

Re: Khalistan, a reality or a shambles?

Posted: Mon Nov 18, 2013 10:05 pm
by Guest
Directed to the original poster of this thread.

Khalistan or anything like a autonomous/independant state for people of punjabi etnicity is nothing but non sense....far fetch ideas that have nothing to do with ground realities.

People of punjab(undivided punjab ) have taken RELIGION as thier first identity. I come from Jammu region of the state of Jammu & kashmir. The language and culture of this place can be termed as Pahari punjab. The demographics ( based on religion ) of this region today is similar to pre partition punjab. Around 50 % are muslims and the rest are Hindu and sikhs. Society is still very conservative and tribal especially in rural areas.

And to be very honest fights between muslims and sikhs/hindus are very common here. From kirtan being played during namaz times, inter religious marriages , playing cricket etc anything can trigger riots. Most of the land owned by hindu/sikhs in majority muslim villages are illegal occupied by muslims. They will build thier mosques / madrasas on those lands and then we cannot do anything.

Now coming to hindu/sikhs relations even that is not the best. There were a lot of riots here in 1984.

If there was no strong Indian army presence here and hindu right wing forces, i am sure most of the hindu/sikhs will have to leave our lands and move to some other places(just like what happened to kashmiri pandits and kashmiri sikhs).

So what sovereign, autonomous , independant state for people of punjab are you talking ?

Post 1984 relationship between hindu and sikhs have also become sour in indian punjab .I am not trying to spread hate but jus wanted to make you aware of some ground situations.

Caste/Tribe based identity further complicates this whole dynamics of identiy.

Punjabies have take religion as their first identity and then comes caste/tribe. Until that attitude exists, there can be no real punjabi brotherhood or unified punjabi state.

Now talking from a sikh prospective, the present indian punjab is the best we can get. Its in big mess right now but we can turn it around.

Sorry if i offended anyone.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No one is my enemy
No one is a foreigner
With all I am at peace,
God within us renders us,
Incapable of hate and prejudice.

Re: Khalistan, a reality or a shambles?

Posted: Tue Nov 19, 2013 8:37 am
by VeeruS
Corrections:

1. In a Sikh state for example, all preferences would be given to Sikh with uncut hair and beard.

2. There is actually a group called Punjabi Taliban.

3. or killing women if they failed cover themselves entirely in burka.

Re: Khalistan, a reality or a shambles?

Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 12:45 am
by Romesh Kumar
joga wrote:Directed to the original poster of this thread.

Khalistan or anything like a autonomous/independant state for people of punjabi etnicity is nothing but non sense....far fetch ideas that have nothing to do with ground realities.

People of punjab(undivided punjab ) have taken RELIGION as thier first identity. I come from Jammu region of the state of Jammu & kashmir. The language and culture of this place can be termed as Pahari punjab. The demographics ( based on religion ) of this region today is similar to pre partition punjab. Around 50 % are muslims and the rest are Hindu and sikhs. Society is still very conservative and tribal especially in rural areas.

And to be very honest fights between muslims and sikhs/hindus are very common here. From kirtan being played during namaz times, inter religious marriages , playing cricket etc anything can trigger riots. Most of the land owned by hindu/sikhs in majority muslim villages are illegal occupied by muslims. They will build thier mosques / madrasas on those lands and then we cannot do anything.

Now coming to hindu/sikhs relations even that is not the best. There were a lot of riots here in 1984.

If there was no strong Indian army presence here and hindu right wing forces, i am sure most of the hindu/sikhs will have to leave our lands and move to some other places(just like what happened to kashmiri pandits and kashmiri sikhs).

So what sovereign, autonomous , independant state for people of punjab are you talking ?

Post 1984 relationship between hindu and sikhs have also become sour in indian punjab .I am not trying to spread hate but jus wanted to make you aware of some ground situations.

Caste/Tribe based identity further complicates this whole dynamics of identiy.

Punjabies have take religion as their first identity and then comes caste/tribe. Until that attitude exists, there can be no real punjabi brotherhood or unified punjabi state.

Now talking from a sikh prospective, the present indian punjab is the best we can get. Its in big mess right now but we can turn it around.

Sorry if i offended anyone.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No one is my enemy
No one is a foreigner
With all I am at peace,
God within us renders us,
Incapable of hate and prejudice.
Very well and rightly said. Thanks for unbiased views based on personal experience and ground reality.

Re: Khalistan, a reality or a shambles?

Posted: Wed Nov 20, 2013 1:02 am
by Romesh Kumar
Nihal Singh Kanakpuria wrote:VeeruS and (Serjinder Singh Ji with due respect to you)

What in this world is the relevance of pre-partition Punjab with the concept of Khalistan? Even in history of Khalistan , off course none what so ever, apart from malice.

If you like it or not but Sikhs need a homeland, You can call it Khalistan or anything else , a land governed and ruled by Sikh Values, explicitly or implicitly , sure a lot of politically correct people might think and say No, and point out shortcomings of the general Khalistan movement , but they same would yearn to live in it if ever there was a land governed and ruled by Sikh values, a Sikh HomelandNihal
What is your definition and description of 'a homeland' ?
What are those Sikh values to rule over a state which you think are not there in Constitution of India ?
Did Maharaja Ranjit Singh enforce any Sikh values during his rule over united Punjab ?
Do non-sikhs of Indian Punjab not need their home land ?

Re: Khalistan, a reality or a shambles?

Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 1:15 am
by lakwinder singh
Romesh kumar ji writes
What is your definition and description of 'a homeland' ?
What are those Sikh values to rule over a state which you think are not there in Constitution of India ?
Did Maharaja Ranjit Singh enforce any Sikh values during his rule over united Punjab ?
Do non-sikhs of Indian Punjab not need their home land ?
I did not want to involve myself in this discussion.But above queries need not be answered.

Ramesh ji, sikhs are a minority in India.If Muslims got Pakistan and Hindus got India, sikhs
should have got a country of their own. That you can call their homeland.British had got sikh
kingdom by trickery from a child Maharaja.Once they left, the rightful heir to that territory
were sikhs.Nehru had promised them that they will give sikhs an autonomous region but later
on backed out.

What did constitution of India did when sikhs were butchered in streets of delhi,kanpur and Bokoro
in 1984. What is constitution of India doing now to bring culprits to justice. What constitution you
are talking about?

He was a monarch and sikhs had passed through a phase of immense persecution but he had sikh
values that teach us "Manas ki Jaat sabhe eko pehchanbo" Recognize all human as one (Dasam Granth
sahib) .So in sikh rule everyone should be equal. No discrimination on the basis of caste, creed or religion.

You need to recognise that Punjab was a sikh kingdom and sikhs were the legitimate owners of this
after British left. Since there is equal treatment for all why will they need another area.

Re: Khalistan, a reality or a shambles?

Posted: Sun Nov 24, 2013 7:57 am
by VeeruS
So in sikh rule everyone should be equal. No discrimination on the basis of caste, creed or religion.
I don't believe this would happen in a Sikh kingdom at all. Just look around today, among those people who consider themselves Sikhs, people with uncut hair are given preference.
You need to recognise that Punjab was a sikh kingdom and sikhs were the legitimate owners of this
after British left. Since there is equal treatment for all why will they need another area.
Let me just throw this in there that Maharaja Ranjit Singh was a Jatt and as per some of the Sikhs, he would not even be considered a Sikh. But that's a separate issue. Plus, there were many non-Sikh kings under him.

Re: Khalistan, a reality or a shambles?

Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 3:36 am
by lakwinder singh
I don't believe this would happen in a Sikh kingdom at all. Just look around today, among those people who consider themselves Sikhs, people with uncut hair are given preference.
In religious domain, maryada of religion should prevail.

When i say people of all denominations should be equal in sikh rule it means administration impartiality while governing. It has happened in Maharaja Ranjit Singh's time. Most of his ministers were from other religions.
Let me just throw this in there that Maharaja Ranjit Singh was a Jatt and as per some of the Sikhs, he would not even be considered a Sikh. But that's a separate issue. Plus, there were many non-Sikh kings under him.
His was a sikh rule. A sikh has no caste and hence his caste was of no significance. He struck coins in the name of Sikh Gurus. He did seva of gilding of Harmandir sahib as a humble servant Gurus.

There were non sikh administrators, Governors and ministers under him but i am hearing first time that there were other kingdoms under him.

Re: Khalistan, a reality or a shambles?

Posted: Mon Nov 25, 2013 3:51 am
by Romesh Kumar
lakwinder singh wrote:I did not want to involve myself in this discussion.But above queries need not be answered.

Ramesh ji, sikhs are a minority in India.If Muslims got Pakistan and Hindus got India, sikhs
should have got a country of their own. That you can call their homeland.British had got sikh
kingdom by trickery from a child Maharaja.Once they left, the rightful heir to that territory
were sikhs.Nehru had promised them that they will give sikhs an autonomous region but later
on backed out.

What did constitution of India did when sikhs were butchered in streets of delhi,kanpur and Bokoro
in 1984. What is constitution of India doing now to bring culprits to justice. What constitution you
are talking about?

He was a monarch and sikhs had passed through a phase of immense persecution but he had sikh
values that teach us "Manas ki Jaat sabhe eko pehchanbo" Recognize all human as one (Dasam Granth
sahib) .So in sikh rule everyone should be equal. No discrimination on the basis of caste, creed or religion.
You need to recognise that Punjab was a sikh kingdom and sikhs were the legitimate owners of this
after British left. Since there is equal treatment for all why will they need another area.
lakwinder Ji,
Thanks for your balanced words.
If Sikhs are secular and do not discriminate on the basis of religion and they follow the teachings of SGGS Ji and Dasam Granth Ji then they do not need a separate homelnd based on religion in India of today. Let me agree with all the bad talked about India and Indians of today except the fact that more than 85% of Indians regardless of states and regions 'do not look down at any religious place nor at any type of way of worshipping'.There is real and actual religious freedom in India. Problem starts when that religious freedom is exploited for political, personal and vested interests.
Thanks