The Pope is planning to visit the U.S. next month.He is scheduled to meet with various religious representatives in Washington, D.C. These representatives are to include Jews, Hindus, Muslims and Buddhists.
The Sikhs will not be present. Not because they don't want to be present; but because they can't.
From a Sikhism website: Sikhism is "A progressive religion well ahead of its time when it was founded over 500 years ago. The Sikh religion today has a following of over 20 million people worldwide and is ranked as the world's 5th largest religion. Sikhism preaches a message of devotion and remembrance of God at all times, truthful living, equality of mankind and denounces superstitions and blind rituals. Sikhism is open to all through the teachings of its 10 Gurus enshrined in the Sikh Holy Book and Living Guru, Sri Guru Granth Sahib."
The problem is the kirpan, a ceremonial dagger. Sikh's wear the kirpan as symbol of their opposition to oppression and injustice.
The Secret Service says the kirpans are a no-no. The Sikh's say that's too bad because wearing the kirpan is basic to their faith, so they will have to decline the invite to meet the Pope.
The Secret Service says they understand how important the kirpan is, but in their view, it is also a weapon.
I wonder if maybe an area could be provided, at a safe distance from the Pope, where the Sikhs could sit? Surrounded by Secret Service agents with big guns, of course, just in case a peaceful Sikh lunges with his kirpan. I mean, it is the world's 5th largest religion!
Could a bit of common sense be exercised in this situation?
11 comments:
Probably not.
Bob Poris
Sikhs don't beleive in meaningless rituals? Errr yet they wear a turban (surely not out of practicality?)... Underpants, OK - although I doubt if the founder of the 5th largest religion or the worlds smallest faith (depends which way one views it) invented 'Y' fronts too?
Sikhism believes in respecting other faiths? So that's why they didn't want to greet the Pope? Its surprising to see many Sikhs speak derogatively of Muslims and Hindus and claims to be unique, yet borrows heavily from Hinduism and Sufi-Islam, today that would be called plagiarism, however the founder of Sikhsim (born a Hindu) claimed there were no Muslims or Hindus, yet today there are over 1 billion Muslims and approximately 1 billion Hindus - now either that's a miscalculation or just sour grapes...
^^ You obviously prove you don't know much about Sikhism at all..
1. Sikhs don't wear the turban b/c it's practical or because it's a meaningless ritual. It's our identity as Sikhs, like a uniform that shows the world that yes we are Sikhs and we are not afraid to stand out. Someone to help all of mankind, not just our own. I don't expect you to understand the history and respect that the turban has in the Sikh faith but I do think the way your portray it is quite rude.
2. When do Sikhs speak deragatively towards Muslims? A true Sikh is there to respect all regardless of which faith they come from. Hence why the Sikh temple (Gurdwara) is open to all, not just to Sikhs. And that quote you are using when referring to Guru Nanak (the first Sikh Guru) is in the wrong interpretation. When Guru Nanak said that there was "No Hindu, no Muslim" he meant that in front of God we are all the same, despite our faiths. He did not mean the vanishing of these faiths. Talk about wrong interpretation. Sikhism doesn't view any religion as higher or the only means to salvation. We don't have anything to pick with any religion. I think you need to do your research instead of attacking a faith you know nothing about.
Anonymous - You're an idiot, if you'll pardon the expression. I did not denigrate the Sikhs in my post. So, if you're talking about me, you're way off base!
Normally, I would delete your comment as I don't accept comments anymore from people to cowardly to leave their name, but in this case I'm going to leave it up to show what a blowhard you are!
Hi Jacob, incidentally I didn't point out the recent events in Austria where two priests of a 'lower' Sikh caste were brutally murdered in Vienna, Austria, these priests belonged to the Ravi Das sect, Saint Ravi Das, alongside Saint Kabir was one the pioneers of Sikh Philosophy before the time of the 'founder' Nanak 'founded' the Sikh faith. The Sikh Holy book contains much of the sayings from those aforementioned Saints. who incidentally are regarded as lower than Guru's since they are of a lower caste.
One may ask, if indeed all are equal in the eyes of God, then why are some killed for being a lower caste? Indeed why were 1000 civilians killed by Sikh Terrorists every month between 1980 and 1992? Was this to create the land of the pure ? Why are two leading Sikh Political organisations put on the USA and EU Terrorist watch lists? In the United States there were fights even amongst Sikh as to whether they should Eat from a table or from a floor, this caused some hardship to the elderly, so much for caring for the elderly.
My main question is that many Sikh proclaim their founder travelled to Mecca to preach Sikhism, he obviously failed but the story goes that the Kaaba bounced wherever he pointed his feet, now this does sound laughable especially to the atheist but to the Muslim its pretty derogatory stuff (and laughable)
Finally, the Gurus ended up becoming a dynasty, the last eight Gurus were from the same family, yet Sikhs claim that each Guru was some kind of re-incarnation of the other (Go figure)
Another story relates to a chap called Baba Deep Singh who faught against the Mughals who managed to fight - wait for it - without his head - and win.. I mean a joke is a joke but I hope you see my point.
Mr Khan
@ Mr. Khan - Thank you for your comment. It illustrates the fact that all religions consist of strange and crazy elements, beliefs, and traditions.
And many of these strange and crazy elements, etc., lead to prejudice, hatred and violence.
If there were some kind of god somewhere I would pray that she would save us from the religious people!
you are all fools, arguing upon meaningless things.
there is no god anywhere.
alright Mr. Khan, lets dissect your post.
First of all the followers of Saint Ravi Das are not considered sikhs nor is their faith considered a sect of Sikhism because they do not believe in the teachings of one guru or the holy book, they solely believe in the teachings of Ravi das making them a separate faith. Usually when you do not believe in the teachings of a certain religion, you are not considered part of it? I'm guessing thats how it usually work.
The story with Baba Deep Singh. He is a celebrated warrior in the Sikh faith and they still have his sword which is massive and he was a very small man. The thing about Sikhi is that it is a way of life. We follow our holy book completely. The story of Baba Deep Singh does not have a role in our life nor faith. It is just a story. It may be exaggerated but most stories over time become so.
Gagan
Hmm, In 1984 the Indian government invaded the Sikhs holiest site killing more than 4000 people. Then during the Dehli Riots thousands and thousands of sikhs were killed by the government and other even civilians. Dear sir, your research is flawed and also very bias. What organizations are you referring to? Also the argument with the tables. Hmm, I've actually never heard of an argument on that. Sikhs eat on the floor because at the time this practice started the cast system was very evident in society. Everyone sitting on the same level created equality. However the temple I go to there are tables for the elderly and chairs for them to sit on during service and it has never ever been an issue nor brought up.
I can totally see why the story in Mecca with the Kabba would offend a Muslim. I will try my best to explain it. What occurs in that story is Guru Nanak goes to Mecca and he see's that Kabba is mad exclusive and faith is oriented around on. He lays down and a man comes up to him and says your feet are facing the kabba. It is said that he apologized and said face my feet in a direction where god is not present and then the man turns his feet and it is said that the kabba moved.
The dynasty thing is very true. However they had no money and their power only stretched across Sikhs. Therefore their power was solely religious and therefore not a dynasty. However there was a specific context to each decision. For example, Guru Nanak did not feel that his sons were humble enough nor ready to lead the Sikhs in the right direction so he did not choose them. Guru Amar das ji wanted his son in law to succeed him and not his sons because he felt that they were not capable.
good job gagan
these people really need to know about our religion.They think their religion is superior than everybody else's.We believe in one god and what is Mr.khan talking about Guru Nanak Dev Ji .he didnot even know what his hazrat muhammad did.Tell him to find out about his own history and not to mess with Sikhism
Wouldn't "common sense" in this situation dictate that the Sikh just leave the kirpan in their vehicle outside or something. If they're really for advancing Sikhi, they should understand that superficial symbols like the kirpan are ok to follow, but aren't set in stone. Even eating meat is allowed in circumstances where it's needed so clearly the rules can be modified within reason. Why is the kirpan so necessary if you're just going to be a part of a discussion.
I'm a Sikh but I feel like this baseless remnant of a turbulent time is not what Guru Nanak had in mind. We're a religion that should grow and adapt, not remain rigid in rituals developed at a different time and place.
Sikhism itself preaches never to harm innocent people and to avoid caste distinction. All are equal in the eyes of God. Whether people follow that however, is up to them and is an indiction of them.
Baba Deep Singh did exist, he wrote many manuscripts of the Holy Book and we have some of his personal belongings, ie his sword. However, the headless idea is just a legend. All religions have them. 10 armed demon kings, talking snakes, magic rocks. All religions have them.
Mr. Khaira
Post a Comment