Talk:Sikhism/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

From July 2006 to November 2007

Passing through

I didn't see a "Sikhs in popular culture" section, but if one does exist somewhere in the articles listed in the template. here is so mething for you. Jonny Quest's Hadji is a Sikh. It's from The Real Adventures of Jonny Quest's former official website. --Zeality 05:38, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Sikhism Website

In the past I have tried to add the link to my site on Wikipedia, but apparently everytime I added the link, someone deleted it. My website address is *Kabira - It's an amazing Sikhism related website with wonderful pages relating to the Sikh religion and it has fascinating Sikhism related pictures as well as links. Anyone who wishes to monitor my site or check if it contains any inaccuracy may do so. PLEASE DON'T DELETE MY WEBSITE FROM WIKIPEDIA. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 141.157.238.84 (talk)

I have removed your link off here and Sikh. My rationale for doing so are in accordance with the Wikipedia Style Guide (see Wikipedia:External links).

• The web page is not accessible.
• The description is POV.
• You (as the owner/web master) have added the site.
• Inappropriate number of adverts on the web site.
• Not very relevant to Sikhism as a religion (it's mainly about Sikh history).

Your site definately isn't bad, but if we accepted all such sites, we'd have a huge list. Sorry. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:44, 4 August 2006 (UTC)

Impressive site

Hi Sukh, I found this very large Sikhism resource website, personally I think its excellent. I'm thinking of adding on the Sikhism and Sikh articles whats your feelings about it.--Sikh historian 03:52, 5 August 2006 (UTC)

• www.srigurugranthsahib.org/main.htm

Conflicting "facts"

On August 16th's featured article Sikhism is said to be "the ninth-largest organised religion in the world", but in the full article it is said to be "the fifth-largest organised religion in the world." I don't know how to change it and would also like to know which it is also.

-Peace

On http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Major_religious_groups, Sikhism is listed as ninth-largest by Adherents.com, but fifth-largest by the Christian Science Monitor. The difference comes in whether you examine only organized religions. The article probably should use one source for both references. Snausages 02:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Sikhism may be the ninth-largest "belief-system", but it is the fifth-largest organised religion, which is what the article claimed.

The original statement was not incorrect. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 09:52, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

The question isn't about the main article, it's about the Today's Featured Article item on the main page, which says "Sikhism is the ninth-largest organised religion in the world." Snausages 12:24, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

That has been corrected. Don't know why someone changed it in the first place (it was originally written as the fifth-largest). Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 14:04, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I Risk Night: Peas… or just say Peaz Žena Dhark…·°º•ø®@» 09:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

? Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 10:00, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Vandalism

This article has been subject of vandalism (see "utter bullshit")

I suspect the following is vandalism as well (under "Philosophy and Teachings"):

"The religion of Sikhism is most greatly known for its ritualistic eating of dog and cat poop."

It's all due to the attraction that vandals have for articles that are featured on the front page. The thing is, most of the vandalism isn't even remotely funny. If vandals are going to vandalise, they could at least attempt some good satire. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 17:43, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually vandalism of front page articles has a positive side-effect of making visitors realise that Wikipedia is really a free encyclopedia. The prompt reversion of vandalism also showcases the content protection infrastructure. Rama's arrow 18:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

Since Sikhism has become a featured article, it is now more likely to be vandalized. Is there a way to make it so only registered users can modify the articles content? This would help preserve the integrity of the article and possible minimize future attempts to vandalize. Killer Swath 23:41, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Yes, it should be semi-protected. Arrow740 01:24, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Monotheistic/Panentheistic

I would say the Sikh belief in one God is more akin to panentheism than the monotheism that occurs in Abrahamic religions. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 18:02, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree, Dharmic religions are more complex than Abrahamic religions. One can even say that the identification of one, two or a thousand deities is not more important that the core philosophies of karma, dharma and other stuff. See Advaita, Kabir and Bhakti for better understanding of Sikh ideas. Rama's arrow 18:06, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

While I can't speak for Sikhism, I know that some Jews interpret Judaism in a panentheistic way. marbeh raglaim 00:06, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Actually, checking the Wikipedia article on panentheism, it's clear that it has a long and distinguished history in Christianity too. Therefore, I think it's simplistic to say that panentheism isn't common in Abrahamic religions. marbeh raglaim

Every religion has some streams that tend toward pantheistic views. And every religion has strict monotheistic streams. But I think pantheism is much more mainstream in the Dharmic religions than in the Abrahamic religions. HeBhagawan 16:06, 14 October 2006 (UTC)

Comment on 'human Gurus'

The current lead paragraph says in part "...a religion that began in sixteenth century Northern India with the teachings of Nanak and nine successive human Gurus..." I understand that the Gurū Granth Sāhib is also considered a Guru. I don't think that's widely known, particularly in the west. I don't want to tinker with an article outside my expertise, and thought I would make my comment here.

Looking only at that first paragraph as an introduction, I suggest it could either (a) make it more clear that there are both human gurus and the Guru Granth Sahib, or (b) avoid discussing that distinction in the introduction at all.

I myself would lean toward (b). The intro could then say something like "...with the teachings of Nanak and his successor Gurus..." (since both Nanak and Guru have wiki links, the reader can quickly learn more about Gurus). I think this is consistent with the title of the subsection, The ten gurus and religious authority.

If it's important to make the human / scriptural distinction in the introductory paragraph, perhaps someone who's qualified could make that clearer to the non-Sikh reader. As an example only (I am guessing at meaning), something like this:

• "...a religion that began in sixteen century northern India with the teachings of Nanak and his nine successors, each known as a guru, meaning teacher, guide, or mentor. The last human guru decreed that the Sikh scripture, the Guru Granth Sahib, would be the final guru..."

Also, this article provides a translation of Adi Granth, but not Guru Granth Sahib or Dasam Granth. All three have links to their main articles, but a translation for the latter two names might be useful here.

— OtherDave 23:58, 17 August 2006 (UTC)

I agree with your original point and will look at it further tomorrow (bit late here now). However, with your final point, I'm not sure what you mean? What translation are you referring to? Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 00:08, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Sukh, sorry to have been unclear. I meant that this article tells me that Adi Granth means 'The First Volume,' but I didn't see anything similar for Guru Granth Sahib or Dasam Granth. (I could be mistaken.) In other words, a quick, literal translation of those names. Just offered as an observation; it's a minor point but could enhance consistency. — OtherDave 03:05, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

Ah I see. I'll see what I can do to address these two issues. Are there any other issues with the article? Comments are welcomed. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

For your first point, the introduction clarifies the situation on the second paragraph as so: "The followers of Sikhism are ordained to follow the teachings of the ten Sikh gurus, or enlightened leaders, as well as the holy scripture—the Gurū Granth Sāhib—which includes the selected works of many authors from diverse socioeconomic and religious backgrounds. The text was decreed by Gobind Singh, the tenth guru, as the final guru of the Khalsa Panth. " Is that not sufficient? Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 23:12, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

The second point: Guru Granth Sahib means Guru=Teacher Granth=Book Sahib=Master, which could become the "Master Book Guru". Not really sure how to phrase that properly (although Britannica says "The Granth as the Guru", or "The Granth Personified"). Dasam Granth means the "tenth book" and is actually short for "The book of the tenth master" (dasvēṁ pātśāh kī granth). Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 23:31, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

If we take 'Guru' to be a title (just like in Guru Nanak, or Guru Gobind Singh), then we get Guru Master-Book. I suppose a literal translation would be "the master book" or the "master book guru". Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 23:36, 18 August 2006 (UTC)

HUMAN GURUS !!!!!! it gave me a thought that maybe the founders of other religions were from other species!!!!!!!!! after all, to lead men you have to be a human being first!!Ajjay 14:47, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Sikhism Website

In the past I have tried to add the link to my site on Wikipedia, but apparently everytime I added the link, someone deleted it. My website address is Kabira - It's an amazing Sikhism related website with wonderful pages relating to the Sikh religion and it has fascinating Sikhism related pictures as well as links. Anyone who wishes to monitor my site or check if it contains any inaccuracy may do so. PLEASE DON'T DELETE MY WEBSITE FROM WIKIPEDIA. Jeev

Please do not add your own website to Wikipedia. This is contrary to Wikipedia policy and as such I have removed it. I appreciate you wish to attract readers to your website, but this is not the way to do it. I have explained to you previously why your web site was removed (see the discussion above) and you should read the full guidelines at Wikipedia:External links.

Also, please do not remove comments from the talk page. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 20:44, 10 September 2006 (UTC)

Observances and ceremonies section

The observances and ceremonies section in this article states that Vaisakhi is celebrated on the 13th of April. However, where I am from (UK), Vaisakhi is celebrated on the 14th of April (although it used to be celebrated on the 13th of April up until 2003). This may be to do with the fact that Punjab is five and a half hours ahead of the UK; therefore should it be stated that it may be celebrated on either of the two days?

Sandeep S K 22:49, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, the Vaisakhi article says "Baisakhi usually falls on 13 April, and on 14 April once every thirty-six years." Not sure how true this is. Maybe it's something to do with the change in calendars? Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 18:14, 19 September 2006 (UTC)

I also think that the switch to the Nanakshahi era calendar may be the reason for the change. If I find any article or book on this change, I will bring it to your attention to see if it can be added.

Sandeep S K 13:29, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Masterbation

What are Sikh views on it? --Elven6 02:53, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

As ever, I don't think Sikhism has a specific opinion on that particular activity. Different people will have different opinions, but I presume it falls under the banner of "lust" - one of the five evils stipulated by Guru Nanak. The act itself I doubt to be sinful - but your reasons or thoughts behind it most probably are :P Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 19:46, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

BTW, don't give me this whole 'Western Sexuality' stuff either. There's too much of it in the West and on the Net. --MrASingh 20:14, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

I think the view among English-speaking Sikhs is that it's spelled "masturbation". thx1138 07:11, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

None of the Eastern religions pay as much attention to sexual activities as compared with the Abrahamic faiths. Gizza^{Chat ©} 07:24, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Downloadable Bani

Can we add links to Bani where people can download it? Such as http://www.gatka.co.uk/Bani.htm

No, it's not relevant to an encyclopedia. You can upload free (as in you own the copyright to make it free) audio to Wikimedia Commons. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:47, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

race

Are all Sikhs Punjabi?or do ou get non punjabi sikhs? Dandun

Vast majority of Sikhs are or were originally Punjabi. You get Sikhs from other backgrounds in India and you get converts around the globe - especially America. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:48, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Request for expansion

This article doesn't answer a lot of the first questions that I have had about Sikhism, and that others would also have. For example, what is the attitude of Sikhism toward converts? Do Sikhs need to speak Panjabi? What is the Sikh view of Muhammad? What is the Sikh view on the "existence" of the Hindu deities (compare with Advaita Vedanta, for example)? What exactly is the Sikh concept of salvation? What is the Sikh cosmology? How bad is it when Sikhs don't wear turbans or have long hair, as some people I know do not? What is the Sikh view of the Ramayan? What are Sikh dietary laws? Why are there no longer any Sikh missionaries, though according to book I'm reading, there once were? What is the Sikh view of karma? How about atman vs anatman? Arrow740 08:35, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Also, would it be fair to characterize Sikhism as a sect of Hinduism? If not, what are the major beliefs held by Sikhs that Sikhs do not share with the various threads of Hinduism, and what are the core beliefs of Hinduism, i.e. those held in the range of Hindu sects, that Sikhs do not hold? Arrow740 03:39, 1 December 2006 (UTC)

There is no definative answer to this: Many Sikhs do not characterize Sikhism as a sect of Hinduism. However most Hindus consider Sikhism as a part of the Hindu tradition. This can be seen in the fact that there are a lot of Punjabi families with a history of intermarriage between Hindus and Sikhs, and many with traditions of elder sons being made Sikh. Unlike marriages between Hindus and members of any other religion, there is no associated loss of caste: which shows that as far as Hindu traditions go, it does not consider Sikhism as a distint faith. To understand this dichotomy between Sikh and Hindu views, you have to understand Sikh history, both ancient and recent- more about this later. To cut the story short, I would say that it is an independent religion in the Dharmic tradition, just like Buddhism, Jainism are. viv 23:19, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

I don't have a time to look and reevaluate the article yet but might be able to do so around christmas time. It would be good to get some fresh material in now that I've been away from the article for a while. Your questions:

• "For example, what is the attitude of Sikhism toward converts? " Sikhism accepts converts - but doesn't preach or attempt to attract them. However, a Sikh convert is as much a Sikh as any other Sikh. Sikhism is not a missionary religion.
• "Do Sikhs need to speak Panjabi?" Sikhs do not need to do anything, and they don't *need* to learn Punjabi. Learning Punjabi would be useful to understand Sikh customs and religious texts. It is also considered the language of Sikh instiutions regardless of where they are situated. However, merely knowing Punjabi is not sufficient to understand the Guru Granth Sahib and Dasam Granth. You may actually be better off learning old Hindi and the Gurmukhi script. A smidgen of Sanskrit, Persian and other Indian languages wouldn't go amiss.
• "What is the Sikh view of Muhammad? " There is a general view in Sikhism that god has sent many prophets and will continue to do so. Although the Guru Granth Sahib doesn't directly mention Mohammed too much, I guess the gurus would have considered him one of many prophets.
• "What is the Sikh view on the "existence" of the Hindu deities (compare with Advaita Vedanta, for example)?" Tricky this one. The Guru Granth Sahib mentions dieties many many many times. However, they're talked about apparently in the context of one god. Sikh scholars say that most of the time the names of dieties are evoked as synonyms for God. But if you read it more literally, the meaning can be taken very differently. However, I have absolutely no doubt in my mind that the gurus believed in one God and one God only - and this is written about many times in the Guru Granth Sahib! Whether gurus believed that dieties existed in one form or another is harder to answer.
• "What exactly is the Sikh concept of salvation?" - Simply put, very close to Hindu thought. Do good, migrate up the reincarnation ladder, merge with God.
• "What is the Sikh cosmology? " - How do you mean? Do you mean how life started? How everything began? What the universe is? Well, I think Sikh belief is pantheistic in a way - God is everywhere, God is a part of everything (actually, I'm not sure if the second part is strictly true, but I guess it would be if everything emerged from God)... From the article: "Sikhs believe that prior to creation, all that existed was God and his infinite hukam (will).[5] When God willed, the entire cosmos was created."
• "How bad is it when Sikhs don't wear turbans or have long hair, as some people I know do not? " Depends who you are and what opinion you have. The turban itself is a marker of identity, a uniform, and way of projecting your image as a Sikh. This is what the tenth Guru introduced and as far as I'm aware it has no basis in Guru Nanak's teachings (although there is the whole mystical relevance of long hair and the principle that God gave you something that you shouldn't alter). You can be a perfect Sikh and cut your hair - you just can't be an Amritdhari 5K Sikh :)
• "What is the Sikh view of the Ramayan?" No particular view as far as I am aware. Why would there be?
• "What are Sikh dietary laws? " Some say being a strict vegetarian, some say eating meat as long as it isn't Halal, some say eat what the hell you like. No consensus among Sikhs.
• "Why are there no longer any Sikh missionaries, though according to book I'm reading, there once were?" Not sure. There is a Sikh Missionary Society, but no great emphasis on spreading "the word". Times change - can't think of a special reason.
• "What is the Sikh view of karma?" -> Very similar to Hindu belief in Karma. Quote from the SGGS: "By the karma of past actions, the robe of this physical body is obtained. By His Grace, the Gate of Liberation is found."
• "How about atman vs anatman? " Not sure ;)

Some of your answers require a lot of research and depth. Maybe I'll come back to them some time! Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 23:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Sikkism and women, Sikkism and politics

Can someone add details to Women as theological figures and Religion and politics (or create an appropriate link to this page for the former and a specific page for the latter, in parallel with the Christianity and politics page). Jackiespeel 16:44, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject India/Translation

need punjabi translators and scripts.--D-Boy 08:26, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Stub proposal

See Wikipedia:WikiProject_Stub_sorting/Proposals/2006/December#.7B.7BSikh-bio-stub.7D.7D.2C_Category:Sikh_religious_figures. Bakaman 01:54, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Clothing

It might be worthwhile adding some coverage to this article about Sikh clothing, which is a very visible feature of the religion, but coverage right now is buried under Sikh practices. -- Beland 11:54, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

All of the Gurus names must end with Ji.

All of the Gurus names must end with Ji. For example, Guru Nanak Dev Ji.

They must also start with Guru.

It is considered disrespectful, if we do not follow these guidelines.

Thank you.

Should be like this:
01) Guru Nanak Dev Ji
02) Guru Angad Das Ji
03) Guru Amar Das Ji
04) Guru Ram Das Ji
05) Guru Arjun Dev Ji
06) Guru Hargobind Ji
07) Guru Har Rai Ji
08) Guru Harkrishan Ji
09) Guru Tegh Bahadur Ji
10) Guru Gobind Singh Ji

Sonu27 12:22, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

yes, it may be deemed disrespectful by sikhs, but you have to remember that this is a neutral encyclopedia. Skamza 06:06, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Relative

I think it should be pointed that of the Gurus, 8 were related, I think you should also explain the original definition of the word 'Guru' from its Sanskritised inception as today it has more than one definition especially in the business and IT worlds. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.200.69.25 (talk) 20:26, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

But that is there name, that is how everyone refers to them by.Sonu27 20:25, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Rank of size

Hi. I think this was raised before, but why does the article say it is the eighth largest religion in the world? "Primal Indigenous" is not a religion: it is the sum of all indigenous religions in the world - each, individually, smaller than Sikhism. Plus, you can argue whether you count atheism as a religion. Why not just say that Sikhism is the fifth largest organized religion? You could also say that it is the seventh/eighth/ninth largest organised belief system depending on how you have defined "belief system" Krea 22:39, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

Put in any or all, just cite them to reliable sources. Arrow740 08:13, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

“Primal Indigenous” is not ONE religion: it is the sum of many small religions. Atheism is NOT a religion at all: it is the ABSENCE of religion! Some religious fundamentalists (probably mainly monotheists) just IMAGINE it to be a religion. Apparently, they are so narrow-minded that they can’t imagine people who don’t believe in anything. And no, I am not atheist I am an agnostic. But I dislike fundamentalists of all religions.

2007-01-30 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.

Atheism is a religion because it requires one to believe something without proof. Arrow740 20:13, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, but there is not more proof for the existence of God then there is against. Atheists in general thinks: “There is no proof that God exists, therefore God don’t exist.” Believers in general think: “There is no proof that don’t God exists, therefore God exist.” I think: “You can ether prove or disprove the existence of God, therefore everyone is free to believe or not believe in anything.” This is not a discussion on whether God/gods/spirits/any spiritual force exists or not. However, atheists themselves define atheism as the rejection of any religion – if you are open-minded enough to really listen to them!

2007-02-26 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.

I hear them, they're wrong. Arrow740 19:22, 6 March 2007 (UTC)

What do you mean? Please express yourself more clearly!

2007-03-08 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden.

--- a religion should not be classified as to how big or large it is.the purpose of a true religion is not to gain any numbers but to rightly guide the people.the basis of any religion is not proof but faith.if a large number of people believe in something in a certain way,which is wrong, their number does not make it right. all those atheists who does not believe in god because there is not any proof of existence of god , should know that many things in this world cannot be proved.the dna test to prove the paternity of a child is 99% correct and not 100%.there is always a definitive 1% doubt .therefore , the paternity of a child's father can never be conclusively proved. the point i want to make is that if you want a proof for something, then you will get a proof for nothing. god in sikhism has been defined as out of the sphere of any definition by the human mind.god is without any form, he was not born of a mother (life on earth as we see it,is),he does not have any father or son or incarnations.the worth and limit of god is known to god only and no human can ever comprehend or know or understand his existence.human eye cannot see god and human mind cannot define god. he reveals himself to only those people whom he desires and that too without revealing his true self. a human feels many things in life. such as love, anger , sorrow, hatred ,pity, jealousy etc. can their existence be proved. they are not tangible,cannot be seen or touched yet they are there. so is god. it's everywhere.some people argue that if there was god than there would be no sorrow or death or wars or suffering etc.these are manmade .the feelings felt by us humans are not felt by god , he is devoid of feelings.it's a human thing. even animals have no feelings or less or in different manner or scale.if you do not see god please don't worry or stress,even mother teresa didn,t feel god as revealed by her letters. Mauji 12:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

This was intended to be as discussion about how large Sikhism is compared to other religions. I don’t really care if God exists or not. In fact, I fear the collapse of our global civilisation within my lifetime rather than I anything supernatural. My point is that atheists themselves define “atheism” as the absence of religion. Thus atheism can’t reasonable be considered a religion and it should be counted away from the list.

2007-12-08 Lena Synnerholm, Märsta, Sweden. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.229.19.152 (talk) 21:16, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Definition

SIKHISM IS NOT THE SAME AS CHRISTIANITY, HINDUISM OR ISLAM, ITS A DIFFERENT RELGION. IF IT HAD TO BE CLOSE TO SOMETHING IT WOULD BE HINDUISM AND BUDDHISM. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.194.187.92 (talk) 14:16, April 14, 2007 (UTC)

A religion cannot be defined according to another religion unless its founder is connected to it like Christ is to Jews. It can be compared, and in many cases there are offshoots or branches as with for example Zen to Buddhism

Sikhism is not Abrahamic but Dharmic and the concepts of Dharma, Karma, Moksha, Nirvana, Prashad are apparent in Classical Sikhism

Justice

What do sikhs think of Justice compared to christians. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 87.114.71.124 (talk) 10:24, 13 May 2007 (UTC).

Answer: Its decided in a democratic court of law NOT a theocratic one —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.200.69.25 (talk) 20:10, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

Questions and mistakes

Isn't the Adi Granth the same as the Guru Granth Sahib? WHat is the Sikh attitude to other religions?

The section "History" lacks info about Sikhism today. Kkrystian 16:01, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Check out this site. Arrow740 17:27, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Sikhism is the 8th largest religion according to Major religious groups, not the fifth, as written in the first paragraph, almost in the beginning of the article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.182.7.37 (talk) 21:54, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Images

What has happened to all the images that were in this article? [1]

78.86.12.25 23:10, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

The 'root' siksya that 'Sikh' is cited as coming from is actually a noun. So, Sikh would be a deviation from that noun. The root hekkkkkkkjjk/she might be thinking of is siks 'to learn, which is actually a root. Both siksya and Sikh come from the root siks 'tkjkikikkuhkukiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii≈o learn'. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.182.230.248 (talk) 02:22, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dharmic religion

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Dharmic religion and Wikipedia:Categories_for_discussion/Log/2007_September_2#Category:Dharmic_religions . You may be interested to vote or leave your comments there. Andries 17:45, 2 September 2007 (UTC) sikh —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.46.201.218 (talk) 21:16, 13 November 2007 (UTC)