Sikhism: Part of Hinduism or Not?

My previous post was about Baldev Singh. But, it is a general blog post about some fake Sikh scholars. There are a number of articles written by some Sikhs, which you can read on internet, in which it has been tried to prove that Sikhism is a different religion than Hinduism despite the fact that Guru Granth Sahib has a number of quotes in praise of Vedas¹ (of course against also). In addition, Dasham Granth of Guru Gobind Singh ji has many things, which resemble Hinduism. In order to prove them a separate religion, some Sikhs started claiming now that Dasham Granth is a fake book and has not been written by their guru. There is a complete series of videos on YouTube, in which it has been tried to prove by Khalistan supporter Sikhs (?). On the other hand, there are the videos of some other Sikhs condemning them and claiming that Dasham Granth is their original scripture.

Well, I am not concerned whether the Sikhism is the part of Hinduism or not. Sanatan Dharma is thousands of years ago, when there was no Sikhism. But, I would like to discuss here a couple of points regarding the separation of Sikhism and Hinduism given by the fake scholars of Sikhism, which seem very foolish. These are about caste system and monotheism/polytheism.

These gentlemen claim that Hinduism is a polytheist religions whereas Sikhism believes in monotheism. For the kind information of these people, Hinduism does not bear a single theory, but it comprises of a number of sects. Shaiv, Vaishnavs, Lingyats, Bramo Samaj, Arya Samaj and a number of other sects & organizations are found in Hinduism. Many of these sects believe in monotheism. The organizations like Brahmo Samaj and Arya Samaj can be taken as the examples in this regard. Besides, there had been some atheist sects also such as Charvak in the history. Charvak was the ancient Indian atheist. Many of the modern scholars also claim the Charavak philosophy as the part of Hinduism. Now, the question arises, if the monotheist and atheist sects can exist inside Hinduism, then how can Sikhism’s monotheism a reason behind the claimed difference?

Another points raised by them is caste system. Whole world knows that many sects and reformist organization in Hinduism condemned the caste system. Vaishnav acharyas and the 19^th century reformist organizations fall under this category. These cults are even much more liberal as compared to Sikhs about caste system. These scholars seem to be unaware about the historical fact that Dr. B.R. Ambedkar first decided to become Sikh. But, when he saw that the big religious posts were not being given to low castes, then finally he chose Buddhism. Perhaps, it was because of the politics of Tara Singh, who had the fear that the neo-Sikhs would dominate the old Sikhs.²

Finally, I would only like to request the so-called Sikh scholars to stop giving such childish arguments and tell something strong, which could prove their claim.

______________________________________________________________________________

1. http://agniveer.com/sikh-gurus-and-vedas/

2. http://lovybhardwaj.blogspot.in/2013/03/when-ambedkar-almost-became-sikh-finaly.html?spref=fb

Baldev Singh - Scholar or Braindead Person

The name of Sardar Baldev Singh is popular among Sikhs. He is supposed to be a scholar of Sikh history. Recently, I reached to one of his articles in which he claimed that famous writer Khushwant Singh is distorting the Sikh history. Well, I have no knowledge about Sikh history, so I would not like to comment on it.

I am only writing to talk about one of his statement about Hinduism in that article. According to him, Hindus feel shame because their role models like Chankya, Krishna, Pandvas etc., used lies and manipulations for getting the pursuit of victory. According to writer, these things were immoral. I must say it is one of the most laughable sentences I have ever read as yet.

Even a small child knows that at the time of Chankya, the condition of nation was worst and the king named Nand was looting, killing and doing many other misdeeds with the people that were under his rule. Chanakya saved them by planning to kill him. On the other hand, it was the time when India was divided, and Alexander was planning to invade. Chankya united India through his policies. Now, question arises what is morality? Should Chanakya had to let all those innocent people be destroyed from the hands of cruel king? Should Chanakya had to leave the nation disunited? If yes, then would it be morality? Perhaps yes, according to fake and self-made standards of Mr. Baldev Singh. I memorize a story which I heard once. There was a kind man who never spoke lie. But once he saw a goat running. After two minutes, he saw running a butcher with knife in his hand, who was chasing the goat in order to kill it. He asked the kind man where goat has gone. He spoke lie for the first time in his life by telling wrong way to the butcher. Now, anyone can understand what was right in that situation. Similarly, if Chanakya played some politics with bad people in order to save the innocent ones then how it was wrong? If keeping people's life in danger because of manipulation of truth or lie, is a morality according to Sikh standards, then I must have to say that God save the humanity from such Sikhism. I am not condemning Sikhism, but I am condemning self-styled Sikhism of Baldev Singh.

Similarly, in Mahabharata, Kauravas tried to make alady (Draupadi) naked, sent Pandvas to exile by hook or crook, tried to burn Pandvas in Lakshagrah, and so on. They did all these through unfair means. But perhaps, all this is right according to Mr. Baldev Singh. After facing all the cheating by Kauravas, still Pandvas and Sri Krishna tried for peace and accepted to take just five villages instead of kingdom, but Kauravas continued cruelty on them. And, in the last Pandvas fought against injustice. But, childish Mr. Baldev Singh sees immorality on the side of Pandvas and Sri Krishna.

Another laughable thing in Baldev Singh's statement is that Hindus feel shame and that's why they ridicule Sikhism and other minorities. Oh my goodness, if this is the condition of scholars of Sikhism, then I must will have to say that Sikhism is on decline. Chanakya Niti and Bhagwat Gita are still being propagated in the entire world, and there is no true Hindu who feels shame on his or her role models. Saving the innocent people and nation, may be immoral according to Baldev-styled Sikhism, but not for Hindus. Hindus don't believe in such fake moralities which stop them to fight against injustice. Hindus feel proud of the dignitaries who did work to unite India, to save people or to save Dharma. There is nothing shameful in that, but yes Baldev's Singh's self-styled Sikism is defiantly shameful.