'Sikhs are not Hindus’ campaign finds support in Pak

[Screambowl]

The Constitution of India has labeled Sikhs as Hindus. Sikh's are not Hindus. Period. It's the legitimate demand of Sikh's in India and not of 2 Lakh People.

I think, the religion is something which no constitution, or bill can decide it's fate. It is far superior than this shoshey

 

[Prometheus]

Actually I am not interested in the religion, I am interested, how relevant this amendment is, and what is the validity of such document. Does the superiority of differentiating Shri Guru Granth Sahib from Shri Bhagwat Gita lies in the constitution or the divinity?

If India .......which Houses largest population sikhs .....doesnot constitutionally provides saparate identity to Sikhs ............how can u expect for countries like AUstralia or USA .....where sikhs are in very less number ........awareness can be created about SIkh Identity ????

got the logic or not???

this has nothing to do with superiority of one religion over other ..........sikhism doesnot believe that our religion is better then anyone else

 

[Parul]

Well I dont agree in there.
You can see their ire if some Indian organizations passed comments about their constitution.And it will twisted in to n easy diplomatic crisis.
As an Indian citizen ,I dont like Pak groups intervening in Indian Constitutional affairs.Whatever the reason I just dont like it.

But we Indians should support for a special status for Sikhs.If Abrahamic religion have thats right we should also allow the Sikhs longstanding demand. .Hinduism dont need Sikh support and Sikhs are not Hindus.

We are not Hindus. Why does the Constitution of a Secular Country labels us Hindu. Sikh's living in Pakistan or anywhere else in the world has right to support fellow Sikh's. Government of India says, India is Home of Prosecuted Hindus allover the Globe. Likewise, it's role of Sikhs living in Pakistan or elsewhere to Support there Sikh's brothers legitimate demand in whatever posibble way they can. Hence, I don't have any problem with it. The Problem lies within the Secular Constitution of India. Blame it, not the other's who are supporting right thing.

 

[Screambowl]

If India .......which Houses largest population sikhs .....doesnot constitutionally provides saparate identity to Sikhs ............how can u expect for countries like AUstralia or USA .....where sikhs are in very less number ........awareness can be created about SIkh Identity ????

got the logic or not???

this has nothing to do with superiority of one religion over other ..........sikhism doesnot believe that our religion is better then anyone else

Most of the countries abroad don't recognize Hinduism as a religion, then how is sikhism going to be recognized by their constitution, when sikhs are filing it Vs Hinduism, which is itself not recognized? Example in italy.

It should be rather Sikhs are not Muslims. Because confusion prevail due to beard and turbun, more over Islam is recognized throughout the world.

 

[Prometheus]

Most of the countries abroad don't recognize Hinduism as a religion, then how is sikhism going to be recognized by their constitution, when sikhs are filing it Vs Hinduism, which is itself not recognized? Example in italy.

It should be rather Sikhs are not Muslims. Because confusion prevail due to beard and turbun, more over Islam is recognized throughout the world.

work should always start at home .......... And btw ....many countries do recognise Sikhs as separate religion .......Its just "Sikular" India with hard core so called "Nationalist" are very reluctant in SIkh Demands

 

[Parul]

Most of the countries abroad don't recognize Hinduism as a religion, then how is sikhism going to be recognized by their constitution, when sikhs are filing it Vs Hinduism, which is itself not recognized? Example in italy.

It should be rather Sikhs are not Muslims. Because confusion prevail due to beard and turbun, more over Islam is recognized throughout the world.

It is rather for: We are neither Hindus nor Muslim. Our Religion is Distinct and not Hinduism.

 

[Ganges Zephyr]

Well..this demand is unclear and uncalled for as article 25 (sec b) also include jains and buddhists and not only sikhs. The reason is of course the origin of these religions (off shoot of Hinduism). The inception of these streams were based on methodology of worshiping rather than a separate religion....this changed over time

PS: Founder of Sikhisim Guru Nanak Sahib was himself a Hindu

 

[SrNair]

We are not Hindus. Why does the Constitution of a Secular Country labels us Hindu. Sikh's living in Pakistan or anywhere else in the world has right to support fellow Sikh's. Government of India says, India is Home of Presecuted Hindus allover the Globe. Likewise, it's role of Sikhs living in Pakistan or elsewhere to Support there Sikh's brothers legitimate demand in whatever posibble way they can. Hence, I don't have any problem with it. The Problem lies within the Secular Constitution of India. Blame it, not the other's who are supporting right thing.

We are not Hindus. Why does the Constitution of a Secular Country labels us Hindu. Sikh's living in Pakistan or anywhere else in the world has right to support fellow Sikh's. Government of India says, India is Home of Presecuted Hindus allover the Globe. Likewise, it's role of Sikhs living in Pakistan or elsewhere to Support there Sikh's brothers legitimate demand in whatever posibble way they can. Hence, I don't have any problem with it. The Problem lies within the Secular Constitution of India. Blame it, not the other's who are supporting right thing.

Well we dont claim that Sikhs are Hindus.
And I already mentioned in my earlier posts that Sikhs are not Hindus.
The guy who wrote that Indian Constitution was a Buddhist.
If your organizations can create awarness about it majority of Indians would agree with you.
GoI can claim that India is a home of entire global Hindus.But that is just a political statement.There is no such clauses in Indian Constitutions.
Pak organization should nt pass comments about internal Indian Constitutional affairs.Perhaps such an effort may undermine that noble cause of Indian Sikhs.Simple .Indians dont like Pak meddlings in their affairs.And you also know that.
In fact Foreigners cant do anything about it.It is Indians choice .

Sorry madam.I cant agree that.I dont like foreigners opinion in Indian Constitution.

 

[Screambowl]

work should always start at home .......... And btw ....many countries do recognise Sikhs as separate religion .......Its just "Sikular" India with hard core so called "Nationalist" are very reluctant in SIkh Demands

Well it's BJP government so you can hope better. But It would have been more advantage if had filed vs Muslims. As I said when you do it with Hinduism, it is equivalent to null, due to no recognition of Hinduism.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Well..this demand is unclear and uncalled for as article 25 (sec b) also include jains and buddhists and not only sikhs. The reason is of course the origin of these religions (off shoot of Hinduism). The inception of these streams were based on methodology of worshiping rather than a separate religion....this changed over time

PS: Founder of Sikhisim Guru Nanak Sahib was himself a Hindu

Indian Constitution does not recognize Sikhs as Hindus. Only Hindu places of worship are nationalized. Sikh Gurdwaras are not.
Article 25B only clubs Dharmic religions and nothing else.

"...providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus
Explanation I The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion Explanation II In sub clause (b) of clause reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly"

Legal speak - Religions are recognized as different. It clearly states that reference to Hindus would include reference to Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists. Analogous to "reference to South Asians would include reference to Indians, Pakistanis etc". Does not mean South Asians are all same.

 

[TejasMk3]

Okay, guys the origin of the movement is the ngo SFJ, the same one that blamed Amitabh Bachchan, Modi for 1984 and tried to serve him a summons when he was in the U.S

Anyway the article of the constitution in question is here:

providing for social welfare and reform or the throwing open of Hindu religious institutions of a public character to all classes and sections of Hindus Explanation I The wearing and carrying of kirpans shall be deemed to be included in the profession of the Sikh religion Explanation II In sub clause (b) of clause reference to Hindus shall be construed as including a reference to persons professing the Sikh, Jaina or Buddhist religion, and the reference to Hindu religious institutions shall be construed accordingly


I think some people are misunderstanding the logic of this article. What the constitution tries to do is group all "Indian religions" under one group due to their proximity and commonality.

But due to the use of the word "Hindu" as religion itself, instead of as a geographic-cultural term today this has become confusing.

Perhaps we could change it to Dharmic, and use Sanatan Dharma for mainstream Hinduism. not sure, but I think the confusion arises due to the usage of hindu.

 

[Screambowl]

It is rather for: We are neither Hindus nor Muslim. Our Religion is Distinct and not Hinduism.

So you want to say, that Sikhism is not a dharmic religion?

They are congress affiliated organizations who are trying to maintain the divide and rule policy. No one cares, If I go to Gurudwara or Mandir or Mazjid. On this new year half of the Hindus and Sikhs will be found in bars.

Coming to law and other things, well this is not the right way to amend a Law by saying Hindus are different from Sikh, it will always create a confrontation. The right way is to recognize Sikhism , that's all. Because As @SarthakGanguly quoted, that is the law.
All religion are equal and same, only their rituals are different.

 

[Parul]

Well we dont claim that Sikhs are Hindus.
And I already mentioned in my earlier posts that Sikhs are Hindus.
The guy who wrote that Indian Constitution was a Buddhist.
If your organizations can create awarness about it majority of Indians would agree with you.
GoI can claim that India is a home of entire global Hindus.But that is just a political statement.There is no such clauses in Indian Constitutions.
Pak organization should nt pass comments about internal Indian Constitutional affairs.Perhaps such an effort may undermine that noble cause of Indian Sikhs.Simple .Indians dont like Pak meddlings in their affairs.And you also know that.
In fact Foreigners cant do anything about it.It is Indians choice .

Sorry madam.I cant agree that.I dont like foreigners opinion in Indian Constitution.

Do you want Sikh's to do Home to Home campaigning that Sikh's are not Hindu's. Apparently, most of Indian's known we aren't. For 60 + year's we've been raising our voice against this from various Platforms ex: Parliament of India, Agitations & etc not only this discrimination but other's too.. However, voice always fell on deaf ears. In return, we were labeled Extremist by Government of India.

It's not foreigners opinion on Constitution of India, but it's the Opinion of Approximately 2% citizens of India. They are just extending their moral support to the Voice of 2% Indians which no one wants to hear. You may see it as meddling in Indian Constitution, but I don't see it.

 

[Juggernautjatt]

Well..this demand is unclear and uncalled for as article 25 (sec b) also include jains and buddhists and not only sikhs. The reason is of course the origin of these religions (off shoot of Hinduism). The inception of these streams were based on methodology of worshiping rather than a separate religion....this changed over time

PS: Founder of Sikhisim Guru Nanak Sahib was himself a Hindu

Guru Nanak was not a believer of Hinduism. When he attained the age of nine years, his father was determined to invest him with the janeu (sacrificial thread of the Hindus). But he refused to wear janeu in front of family, neighbours & family priest. That is why Sikhism do not believe in Janeu instead we believe in five Ks. Our religious practises are totally different from Hinduism.

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Guru Nanak was not a believer of Hinduism. When he attained the age of nine years, his father was determined to invest him with the janeu (sacrificial thread of the Hindus). But he refused to wear janeu in front of family, neighbours & family priest. That is why Sikhism do not believe in Janeu instead we believe in five Ks. Our religious practises are totally different from Hinduism.

So you are no longer an atheist. You atheism extends upto the limits of badmouthing RSS/Hindu/Hindutva etc only. Interesting.