Jump to content

Talk:Sikhism

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former featured articleSikhism is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on August 17, 2006.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 16, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
July 2, 2006Featured article candidatePromoted
August 17, 2009Featured article reviewDemoted
Current status: Former featured article

Ridiculous claims of 120 million Sikhs with spurious sources[edit]

Removing these. Unreferenced news articles are not adequate sources for this claim — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.54.107.213 (talkcontribs) 21:28, September 20, 2021 (UTC)

Inaccurate edits made by User without sources to back it[edit]

This User:Joshua_Jonathan has made an this edit alongside a few others all of a sudden since last week. Which is strange as this did not happen for over 6 months since the info box was created. One of those users who made an edit was User:Mattansilk who was also banned for being sockpuppet ( Just to reiterate I am not saying Joshua or others are related parties of Mattansilk). **Also to note they have made these edits with NO sources and constantly reverting them**

I have no issue with it being referred to as a Dharmic faith. As we share some similar core values and beliefs and should maintain unity with each other.

So the two issues i want to address was: 1) Slogan: This user along with the other users who made the same edits are finding it hard to differentiate between a Sikh jakhaira/Slogan (Bole So Nihal, Sat Sri Akal) and Sikh greeting (Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Fateh). As per Bole So Nihal it clearly states this is the Sikh Slogan as well. https://www.discoversikhism.com/sikhism/bole_so_nihal_sat_sri_akal.html

2) Sikhism did not separate from Hinduism or any other religion. Sikhs themselves view Guru Nanak was Sikh from birth as the Gurus are a reflection of God. There are many instances of Guru Nanak rejected Hindu practices from at a young age such as sacred thread, caste system etc...

I.e He rejected the sacred Hindu thread as a young boy. Furthermore in the Sri Guru Granth Sahib he states "ਹਜ ਕਾਬੈ ਜਾਉ ਨ ਤੀਰਥ ਪੂਜਾ ॥ Haj Kaabai Jaao N Theerathh Poojaa || I do not make pilgrimages to Mecca, nor do I worship at Hindu sacred shrines."

@Usingh0663 , @Jattlife121 , @Javerine , @Ronnie Macroni , @Twarikh e Khalsa - Can also share more light on this.

"The Definition of Sikh"[edit]

There is a portion of the page that references the definition for the Sikh as defined by the SGPC.

At the time of writing, this is the definition:

The Definition of Sikh is any human being who faithfully believes in:

I. One Immortal Being,

II. Ten Gurus, from Guru Nanak Sahib to Guru Gobind Singh Sahib,

III. The Guru Granth Sahib,

IV. The utterances and teachings of the ten Gurus and,

V. The baptism bequeathed by the tenth Guru, and who does not owe allegiance to any other religion, is a Sikh.

However, this definition is restrictive because there are other Sikh sects who do not technically fit this definition, so I propose that this portion of the text be removed from the page because it's technically inaccurate.

This is not to comment on the SGPC in any way, rather to make sure that the Sikhism Wikipedia article is the most accurate when it comes to all Sikhs, not just the majority.

Thoughts? AnyBurro9312 (talk) 15:02, 12 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, many heterodoxical groups do not fall within the SGPC-crafted definition of a Sikh, such as Udasis or Nanakpanthis. MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 13:58, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In an effort to amend the definition of Sikh to include other Sikh traditions, like the Udasis, Nirmalas, Nanakpanthis, etc, I believe the text ought to be changed to:
The Definition of Sikh is any human being who faithfully believes in:
I. One Immortal Being,
II. The first Sikh Guru as Guru Nanak
III. The utterances and teachings as enscribed in the Guru Granth Sahib is a Sikh.
For the first two points, at the bare minimum, all Sikh traditions all orginate from Guru Nanak, so all must agree to view Nanak as the first Sikh and the first Guru. Similarly, since all Sikhs hold Nanak as the first Guru, then all must accept his teachings and writings that enscribe God as a singular, immortal being.
For the third point, I'm unsure how different Sikh traditions approach reading from the Guru Granth Sahib. For example, Namdhari Sikhs maintain a living Guru as a part of their religious canon however, I'm unsure if they also read from the Guru Granth Sahib as a part of their liturgical practices and if so, do they still refer to the Guru Granth Sahib as "Guru", or does it default back to the "Adi Granth" in their case?
All said, I believe this definition is definitely more accurate for the modern day since it would account for all Sikhs under the various traditions and sects as well as those Sikhs who have not undergone the initiation rites to receive Amrit. AnyBurro9312 (talk) 20:01, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sikhism separating from Hinduism[edit]

Any sources to support this claim? I’ve reverted this unsourced addition to the infobox. MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 13:53, 11 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pronunciation[edit]

I have heard Sikh's themselves pronounce it like "sick" not "seek" despite what the Oxford Dictionary claims.

Can anyone elaborate on what should be the correct phonetic spelling? 91.217.105.54 (talk) 17:59, 12 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,
The correct phonetic pronounciation is indeed closer "sik" than "seek". To be fair, the Oxford Dictionary contains both pronounciations, likely to support both cases.
The latter pronounciation arose during the British annexation of Punjab and became popular during the subsequent rise of the Sikh overseas diaspora in Britain, Canada, and the US. AnyBurro9312 (talk) 19:41, 13 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]