Confused about Sikhism/Hinduism differences

[Aupmanyav]

How is it stupidity if you said the majority of Sikh militants (not a bad word) were Pakistani Muslims undercover?

.. but everyone blames Sonia Gandhi for Manmohan Singh's weaknesses as a Prime Minister. And they blame Indira Gandhi and not Zail Singh for Bluestar

If you can, kindly find me the post where I have said this.

Because Gyani zail Singh and Manmohan Singh could not have got their positions without the approval of Indira or Sonia Gandhi, since the family controls the party. They were not like Narendra Modi, whom the BJP had to choose as Prime Minister because no one else fitted the bill. Modi stand on his own qualities. Sonia could have easily chosen Pranab Mukherjee, Chidambaram, Antony or anyone else as Prime Minister Instead of Manmohan Singh. They would also have acted the way Sonia wanted them to act. Dr. Manmohan Singh is a nice person but still a rubber stamp. He did not win a single election and had to agree to various scams including the coal scam to retain power for Congress.

1. Hinduism and Sikhism are different religions yet Hindus celebrate Baisakhi and Sikhs celebrate Rakhi and Lohri (I actually don't know what Lohri is about)

How would you know since you are a Pakistani Muslim who is neither well-versed in history nor in Indian politics. Where were you educated? In a madarsa?

 

[Aupmanyav]

Gujarati (considering the father of the nation is Gujarati) should be the third NATIONAL LANGUAGE!!

India has 22 national languages which include Punjabi, Urdu, Sindhi and Gujarati. We do not rank them but list them alphabetically. They all have equal status.

National languages of India: "There are 22 official languages in India. Assamese, Bengali, Bodo, Dogri, Gujarati, Hindi, Kannada, Kashmiri, Konkani, Maithili, Malayalam, Manipuri, Marathi, Nepali, Oriya, Punjabi, Sanskrit, Santali, Sindhi, Tamil, Telugu, and Urdu."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_language#India

 

[Poeticus]

Who said i'm not. It's just the newer answers aren't given a proper explanation.

How are they not ? Comprehending them should be a responsibility from your end. You have been given such detailed answers that it escapes logic for you to continue asking the same questions.

1. Hinduism and Sikhism are different religions yet Hindus celebrate Baisakhi and Sikhs celebrate Rakhi and Lohri (I actually don't know what Lohri is about)

Ronki, that is largely a Punjabi Hindu phenomenon. So please don't paint all Hindus from all over India having a view that Sikhism is a part of Hinduism just because a few Hindus who happen to have historically lived side by side with Sikhs and have had interfaith relationships with them as being authoritative representation of it all.

 

[ronki23]

If you can, kindly find me the post where I have said this.

Army action on that day because the separatists had congregated there. Congress had tried to appease Sikhs but that did not work since ISI and ex-patriot Sikhs also were involved. ISI must have paid huge amounts to them to to create unrest, I am sure, they still do. They do the same in Kashmir. Syed Ali Shah Gilani was found involved in hawala deals which the government in power overlooked in the interest of peace in the state. One has to do all this in real-politik. Bhinderawale was virtually a prisoner in the hands of separatists.

Yes, Bhindrawale was propped by Congress, Giani Zail Singh, and Indira Gandhi against Akali Dal. Then Pakistan entered the scene. Bhinderawale was then, sort of, a prisoner of separatists. Yes, Indira Gandhi made the same mistake that Pakistan made in denying power to Sheikh Mujeeb. They did not want Akali Dal ruling Punjab forgetting that this is a part of democracy. Governments change. For the last five years Akali Dal and BJP are in power in Punjab and there is no problem. Indira Gandhi did not hate sikhs. Sikhs were always part of her government. Buta Singh was the home minister at that time. Now if a section of people embark on separatism, it is natural that the Nation will not take it kindly. Don't bring Baba Shri Chand into it. That was in 16th Century and he had nothing to do with politics. Of course, there were a lot of sikh officers in Army and Police who conscientiously did what was required of them to do. Christians and Indian Muslims were not involved in Punjab separatism, of course, there were a lot Muslim infiltrators sent by ISI from Pakistan who were disguised as Sikhs.

Yes, that is a fact, both have same facial features, both speak Punjabi, many already have beards, it is damn easy for a Muslim from Pakistani Punjab to masquerade as a Sikh, and it was done extensively (it is still done for spying) during the unsettled days. It is the same for a Pakistani to kill a Hindu or a Sikh, both are Kafirs.

How would you know since you are a Pakistani Muslim who is neither well-versed in history nor in Indian politics. Where were you educated? In a madarsa?

I'm a Gujarati Lohana and born in the UK. Strange how even in Gujarati Hindu community Lohanas and Patels have a rivalry; both are Gujarati Hindus. From the outside India paints them as 'Gujju' but go even further out the world paints them as Indian.

By the way, Pakistani children named Osama could also be named Usama or Usman. A close family friend of my father is a Pakistani 'Muslim' on paper but he eats pork, drinks alcohol and doesn't fast or pray. He comes from a well off family in Karachi ad his brother is a professor. And our delivery driver is an Usman.

Though my sister's friends are weird- her cousin wanted to get married to a boy and her Uncles (I think, unless it was with the boy's family) were standing with rifles to prevent the marriage. And this girls husband has one of those moustache-free beards.

Same as Pakistanis on my course- one has an Osama beard and wears Dhowb(?) or Pakistani clothing while another one never joined in socially and kept to himself in class. He told me to 'hold his notes' during the exam but I never saw him after. I don't think he even passed the course

 

[Aupmanyav]

Army action on .. yada yada .. both are Kafirs.

I said 'find me the post where I have said that most of the sikh separatists were undercover Pakistanis.'

I'm a Gujarati Lohana and born in the UK. Strange how even in Gujarati Hindu community Lohanas and Patels have a rivalry; ..

Yes, these petty rivalries are always there. Among Kashmiris, we have gurus and karkuns. But if you are a Gujarati Lohana born in UK, then how does the sikh separatism affects you? Why are you spending so much time on what the overseas non-Indian sikhs say? If you cannot understand what we have tried to say in 60 pages, then leave it. Give us some new topic (hopefully not a stupid one), and we can continue the communication.

 

[ronki23]

I said 'find me the post where I have said that most of the sikh separatists were undercover Pakistanis.'Yes, these petty rivalries are always there. Among Kashmiris, we have gurus and karkuns.

another quote by yourself

Yes, Bhinderanwale was perhaps not a bad guy. He was first hijacked by Congress, and then by separatists. You are welcome to dwell on what is not true, Sikhs in India will go their way, hand-in-hand with Hindus. The Pakistani incitement (that is what it was, Pakistanis are the same stock with the same language. Many infiltrated and masqueraded as Sikhs and committed atrocities even on Sikhs during those days) did not benefit Sikhs in any way.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Many does not mean most or all. Check the meaning in a dictionary.

 

[ronki23]

I actually read that Master Tara Singh didn't want Pakistan to occur in the first place. Is there any particular reason? If a certain demoraphic hates their rulers, it's better to not have them there to cause trouble right?

Unless he wanted Pakistan to stay for the Punjab. But how did he know Sikhs would be unsafe if the Bengal incident was the 1st incident and was only shortly before the partition occurred (and it was in Bengal and not Punjab). How did he know before partition that there would be riots if partition occured?

Sikhwiki

In 1947, Master Tara Singh and the Akali Dal opposed the formation of Pakistan. He was the first to raise the slogan of 'Pakistan Murdabad', outside Punjab Assembly, Lahore, in the presence of the pro-pakistani crowds. He refused to be tempted by the Muslim League offer of an autonomous Sikh state within the political boundaries of Pakistan.

Sikh History

[FONT=Times New Roman, Arial, comic sans ms]He was prodigal of assurances, and told the Sikh leaders that the Sikhs would have a position of honour in the new State. But he refrained from elaborating. Malik Hardit Singh tried to extract from him a more specific enunciation and raised some concrete issues. He said that in Pakistan there would presumably be a parliament, a cabinet, armed services, and so on. He wished Jinnah to say what exactly would be the Sikhs' position in these and other instruments of State. Jinnah dodged by inviting the Sikhs to set forth their demands in writing and by citing the instance of Zaghlul Pasha of Egypt. Zaghlul Pasha, he said, asked the Copts, the Christian minority, to give him their charter of demands. Without having a look at what was written in document, Zaghlul Pasha signed, "I agree." " That is how I shall treat the Sikhs," said Jinnah. Hardit Singh continued his thrusts and said, "You are being very generous, Mr Jinnah, but how about your succcessors? What is the guarantee that they would implement the assurance given by you?" "My friend, in Pakistan my word will be like the word of God. No one dare go back on it," replied Jinnah. " [/FONT]

Britannica

In 1961 Tara Singh declared that he would fast until the Indian prime minister, Jawaharlal Nehru, ceded a portion of the Punjab as a Sikh state or until death claimed him. He began his fast in August at the Harmandir Sahib (Golden Temple) at Amritsar, but Nehru responded that submission to Tara Singh’s demands would be against India’s secular constitution and unfair to the Hindus in Punjab. After a personal letter from Nehru promising to investigate Sikh claims, Tara Singh broke his 48-day fast, incurring the wrath of the Sikh people. Tara Singh was brought to trial before a council of pijaras (Sikh religious leaders) and pleaded guilty. His failure to starve to death in defense of his ideals had discredited him as a leader of the SAD, and Sant Fateh Singh was elected in his place. Tara Singh’s dream of a Punjabi-speaking state was realized in 1966, when the Indian state of Punjab was divided and the Hindi-speaking portion of it was created as the separate state of Haryana.

Sikh Freedom

Redistribution of provincial boundaries is essential and inevitable. I stand for same autonomous unit as well. If Sikh desire to function as such a unit, I should like them to have a same autonomous in the province so that they may have a sense of freedom. (Jawaharlal Nehru, 1945)

Panth Khalsa:

[FONT=Arial,Verdana, Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Verdana, Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Verdana, Helvetica]"The brave Sikhs of the Punjab entitled to special consideration. I nothing wrong in an area and a set up in the North wherein the Sikhs can experience the glow of freedom."[Nehru] In these words, an autonomous state to the Sikhs, within India, was promised. ..

[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Verdana, Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Verdana, Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Verdana, Helvetica]In April 1947, Mr. Jinnah, in consultation with certain most powerful leaders of the British Cabinet in London, offered to the Sikhs, first through Master Tara Singh and then through the Maharaja of Patiala, a sovereign Sikh state comprising areas lying in the west of Panipat and east of the left bank of the Ravi river on the understanding that this State then confederates with Pakistan on very advantageous terms to the Sikhs. But Master Tara Singh summarily rejected this attractive offer. The Maharaja of Patiala declined to accept it in consultation with Sardar Patel and Pandit Jawahar Lal Nehru.

[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT][FONT=Arial,Verdana, Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Verdana, Helvetica][FONT=Arial,Verdana, Helvetica]The British leaders had asked Sardar Baldev Singh to stay behind because the wanted to propose to him that if Sikhs were not ready to enter into the agreement with Muslims, then the Sikhs could be given an independent state which extended from Panipat to Nanakana Sahib with extended excess upto the seashore. The Britishers were ready to station 25,000 British troops and war equipment for ten years and provide help in the administration provided the Sikhs agreed to provide 50,000 soldiers be stationed at Singapore and other colonies to help the Britishers for the next ten years. After ten years the agreement could be reconsidered. Through this agreement the administration and defence of independent Khalistan would have been ensured and there would have been no need to enter into an agreement with either India or Pakistan for the purposes of their administration and defence. Even Muslim League had agreed this proposal because it would give then strong buffer state between Pakistan and India.


[/FONT][/FONT][/FONT]

 

[Aupmanyav]

I actually read that Master Tara Singh didn't want Pakistan to occur in the first place. Is there any particular reason? If a certain demoraphic hates their rulers, it's better to not have them there to cause trouble right?

Some of Pakistan's provinces themselves did not want a partition. The demand was mainly from Muslims of Punjab. If India was not partitioned, then there might have been many Muslim Prime Ministers of India because the Hindu vote is always divided and Muslims many a times voted en-block. Hindus and Sikhs did not believe in a state based on religion. It was the Muslims of Punjab who wanted separation. Now there is intense hatred between the provinces of what is left of Pakistan.

 

[ronki23]

Some of Pakistan's provinces themselves did not want a partition. The demand was mainly from Muslims of Punjab. If India was not partitioned, then there might have been many Muslim Prime Ministers of India because the Hindu vote is always divided and Muslims many a times voted en-block. Hindus and Sikhs did not believe in a state based on religion. It was the Muslims of Punjab who wanted separation. Now there is intense hatred between the provinces of what is left of Pakistan.

What I meant was, if Muslims wanted partition and didn't want to be ruled by other religions, why did Hindus and Sikhs hate that idea? Is it simply because they wanted Pakistan as land? And how did Tara Singh know partition would bring death/that Sikhs would be unsafe under Muslims? As my previous posts show, Nehru said Sikhs deserved an autonomous state but when it came to it they were just another population in India. Here is another article

How Sikhs ruined themselves in their Brahmanic Leanings

 

[Aupmanyav]

Hindus and Sikhs believed that people of different faiths can live together in peace. I have already replied to your Master Tara Singh question. Well, it was the Sikh leaders who accepted to be in India. Now it is too late. Do not throw the foreign separatist Sikh literature at me. I have already said that India cares two hoots about it.

 

[ronki23]

Hindus and Sikhs believed that people of different faiths can live together in peace. I have already replied to your Master Tara Singh question. Well, it was the Sikh leaders who accepted to be in India. Now it is too late. Do not throw the foreign separatist Sikh literature at me. I have already said that India cares two hoots about it.

Does that not mean they can live with Muslims in peace aka in Pakistan?

And the ' foreign separatist Sikh literature' had actual quotes by Nehru. Apparently both he and Gandhi promised an autonomous state to Sikhs. Unless the word autonomous is debatable.

and is there a phrase in Punjabi similar to Sikhs who drink alcohol should be burned alive with kerosene or those of other religions should be beaten with champal and paraded around on a donkey? As that's what Sant Ji said


By the way, when I meant Gujarati should be the national language, I mean the whole country should speak it. Especially those Indian exchange students who only speak Hindi. And people i've worked with who expect me to speak Punjabi (seriously, Gujarat is bigger than Punjab isn't it). Four main reasons it should be spoken:

1. The father of the nation, Mahatma Gandhi, was Gujarati
2. Vallahbhai Patel was Gujarati
3. Lohanas and Patels are Gujarati. Allegedly the former are descendants of Rama
4. Narendra Modi

 

[Aupmanyav]

Nobody can live with Muslims if they are a majority. Some day or the other extremism is going to effect them. I do not think Indian Sikhs have any grieviances. I do not rules about sikhs using alcohol. Sri Guru Nanak would have gently advised against it. Wise people can think of better ways than beating by chappal or making them ride donkeys. Sorry, it is not possible to make Gujarati the only national language. This goes against the Indian constitution. Even Mahatma Gandhi, Vallabh Bhai or Narendra Bhai have not said this.

 

[ronki23]

Nobody can live with Muslims if they are a majority. Some day or the other extremism is going to effect them. I do not think Indian Sikhs have any grieviances. I do not rules about sikhs using alcohol. Sri Guru Nanak would have gently advised against it. Wise people can think of better ways than beating by chappal or making them ride donkeys. Sorry, it is not possible to make Gujarati the only national language. This goes against the Indian constitution. Even Mahatma Gandhi, Vallabh Bhai or Narendra Bhai have not said this.

Bhidranwale quotes- perhaps the Punjabi makes more sense. Would prefer a Punjabi speaker to look at it for me:

''I have declared that if there is someone who drinks while wearing a kirpaan, and you catch him drunk, the punishment I have announced is that you should get him examined by a doctor (to make sure he has been drinking) and then pour kerosene over him and burn him alive. I shall fight your court case.'

ਨੇ ਉਸ ਨੂੰ ਵੱਧ ਮਿੱਟੀ ਦਾ ਤੇਲ ਡੋਲ੍ਹ ਹੈ ਅਤੇ ਜਿੰਦਾ ਨੇ ਉਸ ਨੂੰ ਸਾੜ


'If I had my way, I would get hold of all these Sardars who drink bhisky-shisky in the evening, pour kerosene oil on them, and set the bloody lot ablaze.'

ਮੈਨੂੰ , ਸ਼ਾਮ bhisky - shisky ਪੀਣ ਨੂੰ ਤੇ ਮਿੱਟੀ ਦਾ ਤੇਲ ਦਾ ਤੇਲ ਡੋਲ੍ਹ ਜੋ ਇਹ ਸਭ ਸਰਦਾਰ ਦੇ ਫੜ , ਅਤੇ ਖ਼ੂਨੀ ਬਹੁਤ ਕੁਝ ਅੱਗ ਕੀਤੀ ਜਾਵੇਗੀ.


'If any raagi, sant, mahatma, granthi even if he is from Bhindranwale (group), who wears a kirpaan and drinks, wherever you find him, blacken his face, put a garland of old shoes around his neck, put him on a donkey and parade him throughout the village or the district.'

ਉਸ ਦੀ ਗਰਦਨ ਦੇ ਦੁਆਲੇ ਪੁਰਾਣੀ ਜੁੱਤੀ ਦੀ ਇੱਕ ਹਾਰ ਪਾ, ਉਸ ਦਾ ਚਿਹਰਾ blacken ਦੇ ਪਿੰਡ ਜ ਦੇ ਜ਼ਿਲ੍ਹਾ ਦੌਰਾਨ ਇੱਕ ਗਧੀ ਨੂੰ ਹੈ ਅਤੇ ਪਰੇਡ ਉਸ 'ਤੇ ਪਾ ਦਿੱਤਾ

Did Master Tara Singh think that non Muslims can't live safely under Muslims? Was he basing it on Sikh history or that one incident in Bengal?

and what about the quotes from Nehru and Gandhi on rewarding Sikhs with an autonomous state and/or British overseeing a Khalistan? Was there a reason Khalistan wasn't created as Master Singh said if Muslims get a state then Sikhs deserve one too. Unless autonomy doesn't necessarily mean sovereignty.

And what about:

Coptic Christians in Egypt
Zoroastrians in Iran pre 1979
The Jews of Iraq- Baghdad was 40% Jewish
Lebanon,Jordan and Syria's Christians

they all lived with Muslims


Also, nice video

[youtube]71qPXECtenA[/youtube]

I guess that Sikhs and Hindus are seen as one religion simply because of geographic proximity in Punjab and the 'all religions are good' philosophy of Sikhi. Doesn't explain the Udasi Panth though, nor does it explain the verses on Krishna as Waheguru.

 

[ronki23]

Please look at my above posts before this one

Some Quotes…
"Instead of sacrificing humans, Guru ji sacrificed goats and started the tradition of Punj Pyaaray. All five Pyaaras were followers of the Hindu faith" {Dr. Himmat Sinh in Rashtra Dharam)
"The Sikh Gurus showed faith in the Hindu faith and visited Hindu pilgrimage sites to show this" (Rashtra Dharam, p. 31)
"When Guru Arjan was doing the Kar Seva of Harimandeir, Vishnu reflected and said, "Lakshmi, the Guru is my own form. There is no difference between us. He is making my temple. Let us go and see the building of our new temple…" (Rashtra Dharam, 90)
"The difference between Hindus and Sikhs was the creation of the English mind." (Rashtra Dharam, 98)
"If today someone were to make a portrait of Guru Nanak without a beard and turban, his life would be in danger but in fact, the practice of keeping long hair and beards began only in the 20th Century. (Madhu Kishvara, Hindustan Times Aug 21, 1999)
"Guru Arjan Dev and Guru Tegh Bahadur used to pay obeisance to the feet of the Devi" (Surindar Kumar, Jag Bani)
"Guru Gobind Singh with the blessings of the Avtars (Brahma, Vishnu, Shiva) created the Khalsa Panth." (Sangat Sandesh, Sept 1998)
"Maharana Partap, the Rani of Jhansi and Guru Gobind Singh were all great patriots" (Rashtra Dharam)
"The Sangh [RSS] is the Khalsa" (Ravani, Dec 1997)

A 25-Point of Attack
The RSS has 25 points with which it hopes to attack the Sikh faith and lead to its eventual assimilation. All 25 points are very easily refuted but lack of education and knowledge coupled with the RSS’s organized attack make this a serious danger.
These points are already being incorporated into school text books and taught as real history. This skewed history is already taught in many areas.
1) Sikhs are an inseparable part of Hindu society.
2) If Hinduism is a tree, Sikhism is a fruit on that tree.
3) Gurbani is like the Ganga, it emerges from the Gangotri of the Vedas
4) The Khalsa was crated to protect Hinduism and Hindustan
5) Japji Sahib is a summary of the Gita
6) The Failure of the 1857 "War of Independence" [in reality an unorganized uprising by Poorbiya soldiers who 8 years earlier helped the British conquer Punjab] was defeated only by the Sikhs
7) Banda Singh Bahadur was really Veer Banda Bairagi
8) The Sikh Gurus worshipped the cow
9) Condemning Bhai Kanh Singh Nabha and Bhai Veer Singh
10) Use examples from Trumpp and other anti-Sikh western scholars
11) The Sikh Gurus used Vedic ceremonies
12) Guru Gobind Singh worshipped the Goddess Durga
13) Guru Sahib was from the family or Ram and his devotee
14) Sikhs are from Lav-Kush
15) Baba Ram Singh was the legitimate Guru of the Sikhs
16) Create posters which challenge Sikh principles but appear to be pro-Sikh
17) Insist on using the Bikrami calendar and share Hindu festivals
18) Call Bhai Hakeekat Singh, Hakeekat Rai and illustrate him as a clean-shaven Hindu
19) Claim [with no historical basis] that Guru Gobind Singh sent his army to liberate Ram Janam Bhumi in Ayodhya from the Mughals
20) To create the Khalsa, Guru Gobind Singh seeked blessing from the gods and goddesses and used Hindu mantras. The Kakaars were also blessings from the gods.
21) Equate "Ik Oankaar" with "OM"
22) Call Bhai Mati Das "Guru Mati Das Sharma"
23) To do parkash of Sree Guru Granth Sahib in Mandirs and put pictures of Hindu Gods in Sikh Gurdwaras
24) Project Guru Gobind Singh as having taken a different ideology from Guru Nanak and to make him into a Patriotic Hero of India
25) Make all of Sikh history take a Hindu tint.

Again, please look at my above post too

 

[Aupmanyav]

And what about:

Coptic Christians in Egypt
Zoroastrians in Iran pre 1979
The Jews of Iraq- Baghdad was 40% Jewish
Lebanon,Jordan and Syria's Christians

they all lived with Muslims

And what now? Are they safe and happy there? Pakistan and Bangladesh also started with substantial population of Hindus. Now look at their numbers.

Sant Bhnderanwale subscribed for those sikhs who take alcohol, I am not sure if Sr Guru Nanak Dev ji would agree to that. Like all other Indian religions, 'ahimsa' is an important direction of Sikhism too. I do not know where you got the list of 25 (probably from a Muslim or a Khalistan site). This is not RSS view. Yes, Sikhs are inseparable part of Indian society.

 

[ronki23]

Untitled Document

Khalsa Sikhs, as we have seen, became increasingly uneasy about Udasi authority over gurdwaras, and during the Gurdwara Reform Movement of the early 1920s all the so-called Udasis were summarily ejected from positions of control.' The turning-point of the campaign came in 1921 when the Mahant of Nankana Sahib (who had declared himself to be an Udasi) caused the massacre of a large group of Akalis, an event that branded all Udasis as the enemies of the true Khalsa. During Singh Sabha days they had been targeted by the Tat Khalsa as prime examples of Hindu influence and are now but the palest shadow of their earlier wealth and power.

The Udasi tenets, though largely tinctured with Hindu asceticism, found many proselytes among the descendants and followers of the orthodox Guru's, and Har Gobind,the 6th Guru, bestowed Gurditta,2 his eldest son on Sri Chand. Gurditta had four disciples who founded as many chapters (dhuan) of the order. These were Baba3 Hasan, PhuI4, Gonda5 and Almast 6, whose followers constitute the bara akhara, or senior assembly. Pheru, a disciple of Har Rai, the 7th Guru', established another chapter, called the chhota akhara

 

[ronki23]

Not sure why I did not ask about this earlier BUT:

Why does Arya Samaj have issues with Sikhism? Plenty of websites say they try and denounce the teachings of Sikh Gurus and 'hate' Sikhism. Arya Samaj from surface view looks similar to Sikhism:

Wiki:

• The belief in only One Supreme Almighty or creator known by name AUM (as mentioned in 40.17 Yajur Veda)
• Infallible Authority of Vedas,
• Rejection of idol worship & other forms of Hypocrisy,
• Equality of all human beings.
• Empowerment of Women

Bottom 3 are like Sikhi views

Google Groups

Arya Samaj Doctrines and Slander on Sikh Gurus

By the way, can someone well versed in both Sikhism and Hinduism explain as to why Sikhs reject being an off-shoot of Hinduism yet Baba Sri Chand and Baba Gurditta (and another son) were Hindu Udasis?

By the way, I heard that the 1984 Sikh riots were OPPORTUNISTIC in that those responsible did it to snatch away Sikh businesses and drive them out. I heard many of them were hired goons from UP and Bihar.
The person who told me said that the army had to be sent in because Harmandir Sahib's vents hid the militants and troops couldn't go in one-by-one. Apparently they were printing Khalistan banknotes.

But I said that many Sikhs in the army and government resigned due to anger. This individual (who is a well educated Doctor) said if they cared so much why didn't they join in negotiation.

Just a few things to discuss before this year ends...

 

[Aupmanyav]

Yes, Arya Samaj was a sorry divisive development in Hinduism.

 

[ronki23]

Yes, Arya Samaj was a sorry divisive development in Hinduism.

Why is it bad? I have a family friend whose father is Arya Samaj and mother Sanatan Dharma

What have Arya Samaj done wrong?

This family I know aren't too keen on Sikhs- call Sardars 'weird' and says Sikhs try and push their religion on others. And say Sikhs are a branch of Hinduism due to saying 'Ram' in their prayers. From a Hindu Punjabi family I expected better