Sikh converts keeping Khalsa?

[Buddhist_Seeker]

If one converts to Sikhism, how important is it for someone to keep the 5 Ks? I've heard that since they are converts, that there is not that much emphasis on it as would be if they were born into it.

I know there is a Sikh sub-forum, but it appears that no one really goes on it.

 

[nijjhar]

Hi Brethren,

Sikh stands for a twice-born student of spiritual knowledge but these with beards and turbans have learnt next to nothing, how could they be Sikhs than supper donkeys?

Sikh is one in a million as in Jesus Christ is one in a thousand and two in ten thousands. Christians of the Book are many but of spirit are very Few indeed.

If one converts to Sikhism, how important is it for someone to keep the 5 Ks? I've heard that since they are converts, that there is not that much emphasis on it as would be if they were born into it.

I know there is a Sikh sub-forum, but it appears that no one really goes on it.

 

[Aupmanyav]

.. but these with beards and turbans have learnt next to nothing, how could they be Sikhs than supper donkeys?

Nijjhar, that is an abuse and not suitable for a respectable forum. If you dare to, say that to a sikh and then see the fun.

 

[AdvaitaZen]

Nijjhar, that is an abuse and not suitable for a respectable forum. If you dare to, say that to a sikh and then see the fun.

It is strange you have decided to focus here.

I feel in a way you have confirmed his words, for your reply has come by way of a threat.

Do you feel that violence is a good measure of spiritual advancement?

I have much respect for Guru Nanak, but through its history the Sikhs have certainly focused more on military and ethnic solidity than any religiousness. It is a great shock to me, for in my time around Sikhs - and I have visited their Temples many times - they have always seemed very nice people, but it is undeniable where his words stem.

 

[Aupmanyav]

If one converts to Sikhism, how important is it for someone to keep the 5 Ks? I've heard that since they are converts, that there is not that much emphasis on it as would be if they were born into it.

It is not essential for a sikh to keep the 5 k's. Many hindus are devotees of Guru Nanak. They consider Guru Granth Sahib, the sikh holy book as their only scripture. These are known as Sahajdharis, sikhs but without the 5 k's. 5 k's are necessary for Khalsa, those who have taken the vow as prescribed by the tenth guru, Guru Gobind Singh. Khalsa was created by Guru Gobind Singh to fight against the muslims who were conducting atrocities against hindus and sikhs. Those who undertake to follow the rules of Khalsa very strictly are known as are known as 'Amritdharis' (those who have tasted the nectar).

 

[Aupmanyav]

It is strange you have decided to focus here. I feel in a way you have confirmed his words, for your reply has come by way of a threat. Do you feel that violence is a good measure of spiritual advancement?

I have much respect for Guru Nanak, but through its history the Sikhs have certainly focused more on military and ethnic solidity than any religiousness. It is a great shock to me, for in my time around Sikhs - and I have visited their Temples many times - they have always seemed very nice people, but it is undeniable where his words stem.

I too have much respect for sikhs and even more for the sikh gurus. That is why I wrote what I wrote in reply to Nijjhar.

".. but these with beards and turbans have learnt next to nothing, how could they be Sikhs than supper donkeys?"

What he wrote is good enough for him to be reported to the moderators, though I would not do that. He has used absolutely boorish language. Some violence cannot be avoided in life. That is why Krishna asked Arjuna to fight, and Guru Gobind Singh of the sikhs asked his followers to keep a sword. It is not a crime to question injustice and it is cowardice not to speak against it. Sikhs were asked to keep arms for a definite purpose, to fight for those who suffer injustice.