Talk:Ravidassia

Ravidasi discrimination

Ravidasis continually face discrimination because of their Dalit status, and Sikhs are continually undermining their own vailidity and unique history by focusing on the formal separation of Ravidasis from Sikhs in the 1920s.

Djalo24Djalo24

That's fair enough - but please don't remove the category. You can add additional categories too that show Ravidasis as a separate religion, but at the same time many scholar believe it to be a sect (which we must discuss whether you or I agree with it or not). Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:04, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Yes I appreciate what you are saying, but the Ravidasi Religion is NOT a sect of anything else because it has its own history. If certain scholars say it is, then we must also therefore recategorise Sikhism, because many scholars and Indian communitites see it as a sect of Hinduism, or simply a syncresis of Hinduism and Sufism.

Completely agree with you actually. That's why the article on Sikhism dicusses syncretiscm and shows that many people to consider it a syncretic religion. It also clarifies that most Sikhs don't believe this to be true. Similarily, this article shows that Ravidasis don't consider themselves Sikhs but that many people believe them to be a Sikh sect.

Although the key difference between the claims of Sikhism being a sect of Hinduism/Islam is that Sikhism does not believe or use the Vedas or Qu'ran. Whereas Ravidasis use the Guru Granth Sahib. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:20, 14 June 2006 (UTC)

Did you know that there is dicussion within the Ravidasi community about whether to remove the Guru Granth Sahib and to replace it with the Ravidass-Deep?

I'll check out the article as soon as I have time. Please feel free to add more information on such minority topics (it's very interesting!). Please make sure you don't use copyrighted images though because they will be liable for removal. Thanks. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 15:23, 15 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi Sukh: As far as Guru Granth Sahib is concerned, its compilation was never intended for a preexisting/potential religious group at the time it was compiled. It is ironic that it has been identified with sikhism so much while most of the rituals that surround Guru Granth Sahib or most of the visible sign of sikhism today have no mention in the Guru Granth Sahib. As a work, it is a compilation and compilation, well, is a compilation. Reason, it should have least to do with sikhism is that not all the saints, who sikhs have endorsed as Gurus over the centuries have their teachings in it (only 6 has). So it will be wrong to say that it belongs to or is a property of Sikhs. Since it is a compilation, anybody can and should be able to follow it. Sikhs have identified their 10 gurus but that doesn't imply that Ravidassis can't have their one guru and still claim it as their holy book. Ravidassis respect it as mush as sikhs do and if they don't follow certain rituals that sikhs follow, that shouldn't upset the sikhs. Had Guru Granth Sahib been specifically created by a sikh (by today's definition, since we are talking in present) and for sikhs, it could have been well argued that its followers should only and only be called sikhs.

Such a phenomenon exists in every culture i.e two religious groups following one reloigious book. As far as whether Ravidassis are sikhs, sikhs themselves have answered this question. They have the "Rehat Maryada" which rules out Ravidassis completely for the good of both religious groups. We (Ravidassis) believe Guru Ravidass to be supreme guru of our faith while sikhs by virtue of the order of their 10th guru, claim Guru Granth Sahib to be supreme and living guru. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rajusu (talk • contribs)

The Guru Granth Sahib was designed as a book for all of humanity not only Sikhs. I can't say I'm a fan of the excessive possesive nature that Sikhs have over the holy book, nor am I a fan of the fanatacism imposed by some Sikhs as to how the Granth can be used/installed.

I respect the Ravidasi's beliefs and have no problem with them worshipping whatever way they please. However, there are even Ravidasis who consider themselves Sikhs and so it's not as simple as saying "Ravidasis" are not Sikhs. Please remember that the definition of a Sikh is not the preserve of the SGPC's Rehat Maryada (contrary to what some may say). Right-wing Sikh groups would be more than happy to say Ravidasis aren't Sikhs because of their belief in Ravidasi as their supreme guru, so please don't think of this an an imposition by somebody with an agenda. The simple fact of the matter is that Ravidasis have very similar beliefs and practices to Sikhs and as such *may* be classified as Sikhs. Sukh | ਸੁਖ | Talk 22:24, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Bless the Siri Guru Granth Sahib, and the grace of the naam and vibration of the words contained in the Great Granth as a reflection of the multi-faceted and multi-cultural spirit of the writings within. I would think it makes sense that discrimination be understood for what it is, a narrow minded approach, and a sure way to hurt and confuse oneself. Fascists of all religion can debate their POVs but the truth just keeps sitting there. You can bicker endlessly about it, but I just have one little minor change to request. I don't need to change the world. So, please if this makes any sense, read this sentence in the Leaders section:

:"A very well known Sant by the name of Sant Rama Nand ji was murdered in Vienna recently by Sikh terrorists, he was well known for his highly personal style of mentoring, including his knowledge of each individual devotee's name worldwide. " - In the Section called "Leaders"

I'm just quoting this description and asking if it makes any sense to this article to leave in a statement like that which appears to be a bit of a character assassination of Sikhs. If it is important to mention he was murdered at all, and somehow if I came here to know about Ravidas, it would be hard for me to relate to or understand why murder of this Sant was brought up, or how it related to someone being a Sikh – regardless if that the person was Sikh, and not Catholic, Hindu or whatever... Since none of this is actually cited, and neither the murder nor the pertinence of the religious affiliation of any person doing such acts is related to Ravidas directly, I would move to strike at the very least that bit about murder and Sikhs in relating to this Sant Rama Nand ji.

Ravidasia

In my area (Moga, Punjab), the followers of Guru Ravidas are called ravidasiA. Note the terminal "A". (The capitalization on R was dropped intentionally for visual emphasis).Buntygill 07:54, 19 July 2006 (UTC) FOR GURU RAVIDASS FOLLOWERS guru ji's bani is for all humanity.everyone pay their devotees to guru ravidass ji when they pay devoyees to shri guru granth sahib,guru ravidass ji bani is in guru granth sahib, so guru ji bani is not only for ravidasi sikhs,some ravidasia people think we should need separate granth only for ravidasia community, but it means they encourage the caste system.although guru ji fight for equlity in the society.guru granth sahib is unique and supreme granth in the world where all caste systems are nil.and equal prayer for all "sarbat da bhalla". guru arjun dev ji add guru ji's bani in guru granth sahib to kill all type of caste systems in the society,and guru gobind singh also distroy caste system by birth "khalsa". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.253.65.191 (talk) 07:46, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

File:DSKB.jpg Nominated for speedy Deletion

An image used in this article, File:DSKB.jpg, has been nominated for speedy deletion for the following reason: All Wikipedia files with unknown copyright status What should I do? Don't panic; you should have time to contest the deletion (although please review deletion guidelines before doing so). The best way to contest this form of deletion is by posting on the image talk page. If the image is non-free then you may need to provide a fair use rationale If the image isn't freely licensed and there is no fair use rationale, then it cannot be uploaded or used. If the image has already been deleted you may want to try Deletion Review This notification is provided by a Bot --CommonsNotificationBot (talk) 17:35, 30 September 2011 (UTC)