Once a month (or possibly more often, I didn't keep track), the local Sikhs where I used to live would set up a stall on the high street and give away hot food to all-comers, no questions asked, donations gratefully received but absolutely not necessary, zero attempts at proselytising.
Man, I have memories of helping serve in a inner city "missions" as part of my (evangelical Xian) church youth group and with my parents once as well and in all instances there were so many strings attached -- at the time I didn't see anything wrong with it but the older I got the more it disturbed and upset me and led (in part) in the long run to my atheism.
Was only later that I realized that at its onset Christian theology was novel among ancient religious systems in that it is not content with getting you to do deeds and rituals and be part of a religious community .. that's not enough. It requires complete psychological conversion ("ye must be born again") and subservience to the belief system, and also to get other people to do the same. And the "here's some food but what you really need is Jesus" thing goes along with that and really rubs me the wrong way.
TLDR I respect faith communities that serve only for the sake of serving. I never saw that in mine.
Something I've found helpful in my studies trying to square my own atheism with the faith of my parents and grandparents and trying to figure out how much of Xian faith to throw out with the bathwater, is how much it started to feel apparent that most of the blame for all this rests somewhat squarely with Paul. It's Paul's huge mansplaining-energy Letters that bulk up the New Testament with their Make the Roman Empire Great Again rhetoric [1]. It's Paul's Letters that do so much of the work to set the conservative "faith not deeds" and patriarchal "tithe to the church as the new Empire" problems. It Paul's Letters that most directly retcon the actual "services and deeds over beliefs" (and liberalism and disregard for the Roman Empire) of Jesus' actual messages in the Gospels. It's Paul's Letters that are so especially focused on the afterlife over the current life, in part because Paul wrote those letters as passive aggressive threats of war.
I've about gotten to the point where I feel I can suggest that I will attend services with my family if I can get them agree that there will be no readings from any of Paul's Letters. That's a hard request to make sometimes because my family isn't evangelical but Roman Catholic, and Paul is hugely respected still by the Roman Catholic church (for the obvious reasons that it is the church that Paul most directly built). But it is slowly giving me a framework of being able to say here's where I have problems with your faith and here's what I like about the faith: the gospels minus the miracles, and the actual teachings of Jesus. (Unsurprisingly one of my favorite versions of the Bible is the Jefferson Bible. It's pamphlet sized. It might be so much better for the world if it replaced all the Gideon's Bibles. Also, I can recommend A Gospel for Liberals by Todd Eklof as another great view of the gospels.)
[1] Very literally, so. Most of the "to" groups were conquests of the Roman Empire either threatening to leave or already left.
The funny thing about the “faith not deeds” view to me is that it doesn’t square with what we’re told will happen when you’re finally judged. There is a very explicit list of things that we are told we will be judged on: feeding the hungry, clothing the poor and caring for the sick. “As you did for the least you also did for me” or something like that. And then people that didn’t do that they’re the ones cast out. Not “did you convert enough people”, “did you pray hard enough”. Not even “do you believe in me”. Those are indeed to various degrees doctrines of the faith, but all of them are also accomplished tangentially if you’re already doing the things you will be judged on.
In my (admittedly limited) view, the actual lessons of the Christian faith as outlined place huge limitations on your own behavior, but demand generosity and gracefulness to others. Christians are commanded to adhere to the precepts, but it is not for Christians to judge anyone else, including other Christians. Instead their role is to serve others as commanded. To cloth the naked, heal the sick and feed the hungry… without any expectation from those you are serving. If you expect specific duties or actions, you are no longer serving, you’re selling.
I think Paul's stuff is deviant from the first 5 books.
I contrast Corinthians 11:5, which I have never seen followed even among missionaries, with Acts 15:10-29, we're in the disciples get together and decide what's really important about being Christian. Spoiler: it's not putting women in their place.
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Corinthians...
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=acts%2015&versi...
Yeah I agree with much of this.
Thing is, effectively Christianity as defined by the earliest Church councils really is "Paulism". That plus the Nicene creed and its definition of the trinity. Which all ends up being really about purging the Judaism from Christianity.
A pre-Constantine and even more extremely, pre-Paul, "Christianity" could be interesting -- though really could be considered a kind of Messianic Jewish cult, and perhaps also influenced by Mithraism, Zoroastrianism, and Roman/Hellenistic paganism.
But I mean, I don't need any of it. But in a way I'm glad I studied the scriptures as a child, and then again as an atheist from a "wtf did they tell me .. that's not actually in there lol..." POV
I also read some interesting stuff about how much of pre-Constantine/pre-Paul versions of the religion resembled Neo-Pythagoreanism, which is a wild rabbit hole. That was a vegan, about as atheist as Romans could get, math loving cult which sounds today almost exactly like the religion's exact opposite, but the parallels are fascinating and the early shared beliefs that the Nicene Creed was also about stamping out are fascinating in today's hindsight.
(You don't have to entirely imagine what that version of the church might have looked like, it is sort of what UU is for and where it came from, especially because of the U [Unitarianism] that was kicked out by the Nicene creed [for trinitarianism]. I do irregularly appreciate a good UU service.)
It's also an interesting thought experiment to frame Islam as the other (more successful) branch of non-Nicene unitarian monotheism. It popped up not long (historically speaking) after the final triumph of Nicene Christianity, after Arianism etc was stamped out. And blossomed in the historical heartland of Christianity (North Africa, Asia Minor, and Palestine / Syria).
What we've ended up with is this interesting historical situation where Christianity is the "European" monotheism and Islam is seen as "foreign" and "other" likely on account of its association with the historical Orient. And yet it is that region where Christianity had its origins and was strongest for the first 500 years.
I find the whole thing fascinating. But also, I believe in none of it.
Man, Langar is always awesome. They are not shy on serving size and the food is almost always legit amazing. Dont' miss out on the halwa!
One of the mind blowing things about this is the sheer amount of people some of the Gurdwaras end up feeding (1000s) and how non-trivial the whole process is from kitchen to serving. All volunteers generally.
If you think everyone is not equal just keep in mind that in 100 - 200 years the Universe is going to recycle you and everyone living here and allocate atoms and consciousness somewhere else. There would be no exceptions.
Now meditate on this till you realize your resume or ego or sense of who you are is just a miscalculated compute cache you hold on to keep your mind away from this truth.
In theory we exist to escape that and truth is temporal.
What does truth is temporal mean?
Existential Crisis, Terror, Acceptabce
Why does it matter so much what people think about everyone else?
e.g. Someone can think everyone worships the flying spagetti monster or UFOs or whatever. And I’ll merrily go on life not knowing or caring.
What AIs think probably matter. So might be useful.
A key purpose for langar was to challenge the prevailing caste system — people of all castes would be equalized by sitting together and sharing a community meal, a revolutionary concept.
Exactly. This is in common with Gaudiya Vaishnavism of Bengal, where people has to sit on the floor and eat along with people of 36 castes- (so called) low and high, at the same level at festivals.
It's still revolutionary to sit down with people you don't know and share a delicious meal. Sitting on the floor is something we don't do all that often in the West, so IMO, that also opens one's eyes to a different perspective. Langar was and still is revolutionary!
Yes Sikhism was a result of/was heavily influenced by the Bhakti movement that started in the south of India around 1000 years ago and then rapidly spread through central and northern Indian. It’s akin to the Protestant movement in that it de emphasized the role of Brahmins and interlocutors and emphasized a personal relationship with god.
Revolutionary in India. I am an atheist but I have to give Christianity credit all are equal before god.
Just to correct a small detail, you don’t need to attend a service to visit langar hall and have a meal. Generally Gurudwaras serve 3 meals a day and you can just visit them. From my experience they will do their utmost to serve you regardless of the time when you arrive.
If you’re ever near one and want to serve they usually are very welcoming of any help and I find the process to be quite meditative, personally.
Even though I am Hindu by birth (but not at all religious, personally), I always admire Sikhs culture of service.
I want to post this video[1] because I think the HN crew will appreciate this.
When you feed people for free, more people show up. So instead of turning them away, what do you do? You use machines and efficiency to feed MORE people.
It is absolutely amazing.
1: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5FWWe2U41N8
When I think about how our schools (in America) mostly feed kids processed frozen sad looking food, I think about videos like this.
Where there's a will, there's a way... to feed kids and others fresh food with real ingredients with the help of automation.
It’s not uncommon for Hindus from northern India to worship Sikh Gurus alongside their own deities. Similarly Sikhs often visit Hindu temples. This is generally not seen as unusual.
While there have been some instances of tension between the two communities, things are not as bad as media might suggest.
Right, I just meant that as an "outsider" I admire this particular pillar of values that are espoused daily.
I experience good interactions with Sikh people. The local store I go to one is operated by a Sikh and the other is operated by an American - someone I went to school with ages ago. The Sikh store is always in shape and if I forget my wallet he let's me pay when I come back or calls me if I forget my wife's candy bar. The American store never looks up from his phone, when I forgot my wallet looked at me stunned at the idea of coming back next time (I am in daily and live down the road and operate a local business) and the one time I know I forgot something they made no attempt to resolve it and wanted me to buy another all with a very entitled tone.
I can't figure out if this is an article about Sikh practices that happens to include a recipe, or an article about the recipe with way too much extraneous information :)
The article can be both, discovering nice neighbours and their recipes aren't opposites.
Is it, or is it recipe SEO but instead of reminiscing about the taste of the madeleine^H^H^H^H poor aunt Jane's deprived childhood and cooking they pasted something legit about said Sikh practices?
I love this. If you’re going to be religious then being true to whatever that is and actually living that faith is cool — especially cool if it benefits society as a whole like this does.
I love the sikhs and their passion to serve. It is amazing to watch the richest sikhs serving alongside the poorest in the kitchens preparing the langar and then serving it
I often see charitable groups from the Sikh community in central London serving the homeless. Interesting to hear the background around that! https://asiasamachar.com/2023/10/10/meet-the-sikh-community-...
My media literacy is not strong enough to understand if all the positive content about Sikh is "organic" or a very successful campaign by them to increase their reputation.
On reddit I keep reading about them doing great things, volunteering, silently providing what is needed to people in emergencies, for example the current wildfires in the US. (e.g. https://www.reddit.com/r/nextfuckinglevel/comments/1i0kavt - currently prominently featured on the front page) And now there is even some on Hacker News.
I am not disparaging anyone here, I am honestly curious about this pattern I have recognised.
Between the assassination in Canada [1] and attempted assassination on U.S. soil [2], there is international curiosity about (and default sympathy for) a group most previously didn’t know existed.
(There may have also been awareness in the American and Canadian Sikh communities that they need to educate their fellow countrymen about who they are and why they’re the subject of what looks like a new form of state-sponsored terrorism.)
[1] https://www.reuters.com/world/americas/what-is-known-about-m...
[2] https://www.npr.org/2023/12/01/1216647148/after-foiled-assas...
there is international curiosity about (and default sympathy for) a group most previously didn’t know existed
You didn't grow up in the UK then. Made me laugh to think of not knowing Sikhs exist.
> You didn't grow up in the UK then
I didn’t, but I do have Indian heritage. I knew Sikhs existed and the basics of their customs, but I was unaware of e.g. Operation Blue Star [1] or the Khalistan independence/separatist movement [2].
Plenty of Americans and Canadians (and, I’d posit, Brits) meanwhile could probably recognise the headdress and little more.
> Plenty of Americans and Canadians (and, I’d posit, Brits) meanwhile could probably recognise the headdress and little more.
Probably not even that. In the early noughties, as the US reached Peak Neuroticism, people attempting to hate-crime Muslims sometimes accidentally murdered Sikhs, instead, due to confusion about turbans: https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/15/us/sikh-hate-crime-victims/in...
Huh, you didn't learn about how Indira Gandhi was assassinated by two of her Sikh bodyguards? It's pretty old stuff but it was a fairly significant event.
Americans dont learn who Indira Gandhi IS.
There are 330 million Americans.
I learned about this in a mainline world history class in public high school. In Indiana.
I didn't say not no American has ever learned it. Im somewhat surprised that you learned it, but still think that most don't cover this.
Do schools not teach about religion there? Sure not Khalistan (maybe in Geography or History it could be relevant), but about customs & beliefs beyond (or reason for) turbans, and certainly existence?
> Do schools not teach about religion there?
Can’t speak for Canada. But my American curriculum didn’t cover the Sikhs. The exposure came from family and at community cultural festivals—it was superficial. Most Americans wouldn’t have even that.
I think the general issue is that while there is a focus on "ancient civilizations" (which, of course, covers India) Sikhism is too new to be covered in that. By the time the Middle Ages end and Enlightenment picks up almost all curricula swing back to Europe. I actually learned very little of what happened from 1500-1800ish around the world, besides how they related to the affairs of what was now some colony of a European country.
In the UK state education system it would be covered in Religious Education lessons, around ages 11-13. They cover most of the world's major religions. As a completely non-religious person I try to keep myself from telling my concientious son not to worry too much about his RE homework
And before (and optionally after). Also variously called Theology, Theology & Ethics, Religious Studies, Theology & Religious Studies, etc. - presumably because RE sounds like you're being educated to be religious, which is not the point at all.
Depending on the place, usually it doesn't get to Sikhs Unless it's a zone with high affluence of a particular group it doesn't go too far after Abrahamic Religions, plus maybe Buddhism or Taoism if your Teacher particularly cares
In my (Catholic) school we got as far as visiting a mosque, which was an interesting experience
Same story in Ireland, we've even changed the uniform rules for our police force in recent years to allow for the Sikh Turban in lieu of the traditional hat.
https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/ive-had-guys-we-are-ar...
Sikhs and Gurkhas would be reasonably well known and have a pretty sterling reputation in Ireland/UK - but that cultural consciousness would sharply decline the further you get into Western Europe due to historical colonisation being African rather than Indian focused.
In the UK Sikh soldiers can wear a turban instead of the bearskin usually associated with protecting the monarch: https://edition.cnn.com/2018/06/09/europe/sikh-soldier-turba...
> a new form of state-sponsored terrorism
Government assassinations of exilants... that's sadly not new at all. Back when Yugoslavia was governed by Tito, the regime sent out killer squads across the world for about half a century [1] - mostly Germany was targeted (because most Yugoslavs ended up there as Germany was rich and happily accepted emigrants fron Yugoslavia), but Croats got also targetted in places as far away as Canada, South Africa, Argentinia or Australia.
It's a dark part of history many people to this day aren't aware of, it only made the news again for a short time after the attacks on Litvinenko, Skripal and Khangoshvili respectively.
[1] https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liste_von_Attentaten_auf_Exilk...
You're correct. But it's not frequent on the American homeland.
[dead]
Sikhs are literally the nicest. Just read anything about them from any source. Best if you can find someone how has ever met any. I've known some but you don't know me so it doesn't count for much.
They are the real deal.
for the most part I can concur. I've travelled the world and i've met assholes in just about every race and religion except sihks. and I've met enough sikhs to have a reasonable sample size. I'm sure they have their assholes too but I'm honestly amazed I havent' met one yet.
They also have the coolest weddings.
We shouldnt make general assumptions about any community as a positive on one minority can disparage another community, we are all human, come to see Sikh politics in Punjab and you can make your own judegments.
While I appreciate the sentiment of not glorifying any one demographic, It’s hard for me to take your comment(s) in this thread seriously.
As a Sikh, I was raised with the Gurus’ teachings that all paths in life are unique and equal, given the person is genuinely trying to make a positive impact on the world, and that good deeds should be recognized and emulated.
I agree with you that Sikh politics in Punjab are often very performative and a hindrance to the progression of the state, but the rest of your comments (like equating langar to prasad in what almost seems like an attempt to erase the uniqueness of Sikhi) comes across as slightly offensive, not to mention inaccurate.
At the end of a Sikh ardas (prayer), we pray for “sarbat di bhala”, or the well-being of everyone. To me, this is also a reminder that at the end of the day, we are all the same on some fundamental human level that transcends religious belief and difference, and as a result, I like to find positives in communities and try to apply them to my own life, so I ultimately disagree with the suggestion not to appreciate the positives of one culture/religion because it may “disparage” another that doesn’t have those same practices.
Are you Sikh yourself? Because in my experience so far, one would never say a thing like this. While you did. That is an example of the difference in integrity between them and most anyone else. You would say "They're no so perfect", and maybe they aren't, but they would never say the same thing about you, regardless how true.
Tribalism around made up fantasies is one of the worst attributes of the human.
All humans suffer from it.
As an atheist myself, in full agreement on all the harms that descend from validating magical thinking.
But so what? That's an observation of no relevance. That particular "tribe", fantasy and all, still put me to shame for being good people. Including specifically in the more intellecual impersonal justice/fairness ways that I generally like to think I have down.
The observation about the harms of religion, in this case without an actual example of how it applies in this case, ends up only looking defensive. What are you threatened by that you feel the need to try to attack the simple assertion that some people are nice?
Dutch people are basically atheist, soulless, cold, materialistic and hedonistic assholes but they pay half their income in taxes so that nobody starves. Because it is the right thing to do. Nice is overrated.
Good for them. So what? Those aspects of the Dutch, even if granted, don't prove or disprove anything about the Sikhs. This conversation isn't trying to claim that religion is good and is the only way to be good. Saying that nice is overrated doesn't really even intersect with the assertion that the Sikhs are very nice. It's not like nice is bad, and my use of the word nice was just a catch-all for a whole bag of virtues, not some narrow definition that means they smile while still abusing peoiple or something. In a follow-up comment I also said "integrity". Is integrity overrated?
What did you think you were proving or disproving? And why did you feel the need to in the first place in response to something so benign? What about the original assertion is so threatening?
"a positive on one minority can disparage another community"
horseshit
I get the impression that there's some sort of controversy that brewed over in the US / Canada recently. I'm based in the UK and my opinion of Sikhs has always been positive, as a general group.
The Indian government got caught trying to assassinate some Sikh activists that have previously called for an independent Sikh state. The Indian government considered them terrorists and the US/Canadian governments didn't.
> Indian government got caught trying to assassinate some Sikh activists
"A former Indian intelligence officer" [1] is charged with directing the attempted killing of "a dual citizen of the United States and Canada" [2] on American soil. (They succeeded in Canada [3].)
It was an incredibly provocative and stupid move, on par with MBS's Khasshogi assasination, but if Riyadh had taken its bone saws to Pennsylvania. (A fair comparison would be America conducting a Bin Laden raid on an Indian national in India.)
[1] https://www.reuters.com/legal/us-charges-ex-indian-intellige...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gurpatwant_Singh_Pannun#cite_n...
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hardeep_Singh_Nijjar#Death,_su...
Yeah afaik they don't need to raise any reputation.
Social media puts us all into an alternate reality.
The video on Reddit is on some level a good example, as the title directly contradicts it's content. In the video you see precisely one person identifiable as a Sikh and many other people, who are clearly not Sikh, performing the same task. Most definitely it isn't "the Sikh community" doing anything. It isn't even clear who provided the resources here.
Reddit especially is full of things like that, small snippets of an event presented as if it were the whole story. It is a very effective propaganda tactic and groups obviously benefit from portraying themselves a certain way and using these tactics to frame an issue a certain way.
What do you mean "clearly not Sikh"? Just not wearing a turban?
Have you looked at that video at all?
Do you mean the one labelled "Khalsa Aid volunteers"? Are you suggesting that Khalsa Aid incorrectly took credit for the langar, or that Khalsa Aid has nothing to do with Sikhs?
I am saying that there is 30 second video with a headline, which shows nearly zero information about the events. And that if you take your reality from reddit headlines and 30 second videos, you will soon live an alternate reality, as this kind of messaging is very effective at making you believe things which are false.
If you think my post had anything to do with Kasha Aid (No idea and don't care what it is) or Sikhs, then I am afraid you did not read it properly.
The headline has says "Khalsa aid volunteers", so maybe make more of an effort paying attention to the video you're complaining about? You literally said:
> In the video you see precisely one person identifiable as a Sikh and many other people, who are clearly not Sikh, performing the same task. Most definitely it isn't "the Sikh community" doing anything. It isn't even clear who provided the resources here.
... and the video is labelled as volunteers for Khalsa Aid, a Sikh-funded and operated charity. Your very basic assumptions are based on your being underinformed by choice or mistake.
We are both ESL, but I challenge you to read carefully through this, two or three times maybe:
"If you think my post had anything to do with Kasha Aid (No idea and don't care what it is) or Sikhs, then I am afraid you did not read it properly."
Not everything is an attack on your people. But I always found it a bit strange how Indian people, Muslim Hindu or Sikh, get so defensive the moment anything remotely negative is said about them. Just to be clear: "If you think my post had anything to do with Kasha Aid (No idea and don't care what it is) or Sikhs, then I am afraid you did not read it properly."
Why would I accept your challenge? Your post and unwillingness to even spell "Khalsa" correctly speaks for the excellent faith and attention to detail that you're bringing to this discussion. Everything about your discussion can be summarized by this pair of mutually incompatible sentences:
> Not everything is an attack on your people.
And
> But I always found it a bit strange how Indian people, Muslim Hindu or Sikh, get so defensive the moment anything remotely negative is said about them.
Which one is true? Are you saying negative things, or is it not an attack? Feel free to answer, but as with the original reddit video, we are all free to decide ourselves.
not all sikhs wear a turban....... just so you know
What a novel revelation. Tell me then, what percentage of the Sikh population are white women? 40%?
Not sure, but 100% of the white women in my house are married to one.
Who cares? Why are you responding with irrelevant trivia about yourself? I am sure you absolutely know that not 40% of your community is made up of white women and that obviously is the people unloading aren't all Sikhs.
By the way, these responses are exactly what OP was talking about.
Because you are making veiled assertions about a community cynically making charity about themselves, based on your quick visual analysis of a short reddit video. You're doing exactly what you're accusing everyone else of doing, with an added dose of poor faith.
My post did not include any assertion about any such thing. What this has to do with (your?) wife is a mystery though.
Of course your reaction is quite telling and really says something about your ethnic narcissism, nobody said anything negative about Indians like you and somehow you feel like you are being attacked. Needing to talk about the race of (your?) wife also seems extremely weird.
To be sure you have clarified OPs question quite a bit.
Thanks, I'm glad to help with OP's question. A more enlightened reader might have understood that I mentioned my wife to subtly suggest that there may be any number of reasons for white people to be working with Sikhs, but I keep forgetting that that sort of subtlety doesn't go well on HN where some people need more straightforward language. Live and learn.
It says Khalsa Aid USA provided the resources
Oh wow, I did not notice. That is an earth shattering revelation.
My post was explicitly about how you can not trust reddit headlines with 30 second videos, which show nothing about the claimed events. But now that you have pointed out that the headline actually says something it has to be true, thank you so much for your attention to detail. I don't know how I could have missed this tiny detail which my entire post was about.
Well if you’re interested look it up, the Instagram profile is there and it shows a lot more of their efforts. If this is alternate reality, please do tell what in your mind is the actual reality?
I think it's the same phenomenon as with the Kurds. Both groups need the West because they are existentially threatened in their native region and have no other allies.
The Kurds are surrounded / occupied by Turks, Arabs, and Iranians - all who have a long history of trying to exterminate the Kurdish people / culture.
Sikhs aren't any better off with their native lands being ruled by either Hindus or Muslims, two groups who have a long history of trying to exterminate the Sikhs.
That's why both groups - quite frankly - suck up to the West so hard and are often picture perfect immigrants because they really don't want to be sent back. Because whatever "racism" you might think exists in the West, it is nothing compared to the religious hatred coming from Muslims and (to a lesser extend) Hindus.
I'd guess that it just came about after the wildfire story, and a few curious people looking further into it.
From my one experience at a Langar event, it really was as advertised - very welcoming, zero pitch or expectation and quite refreshing.
I honestly wouldn't be surprised if it were organic, spurred on to some extent by recent news in Canada.
Many years ago I worked on a project in Amritsar, which had me regularly engaged with the Golden Temple (the most sacred place in the Sikh religion) authorities. I have to say that all the Sikhs I interacted with were fantastic: honest, generous, hard-working, fun-loving, good-hearted people. I do think a lot of this was grounded in Sikh religious principles, which promote a kind of radical moderation that's actually pretty unique among religions. (the story goes that the founding guru of the Sikhs had two sons, one of whom destroyed his life with gambling and alcohol, and the other of whom destroyed his life with asceticism and abstinence. The guru repudiated both of them, saying that the latter was as much of a vice as the former. Instead, he preached that the point of life was to be happy, and to make other people happy: have a family and take good care of it, take care of other people, don't be an asshole, and have a good time. Balance these imperatives well, and you're doing God's work. As far as organised religions go, it's really pretty great.
And langar at the Golden Temple is a truly amazing experience. Men and women from every strata of society, from every religion, sitting down together to eat good food in silence. No preaching or any other bullshit -- the shared togetherness and humanity is enough. Honestly, it's profound. One of my dreams for later in life, when I have the time, is to go back there for a few weeks and volunteer to cook in their kitchen.
That said: Sikhs aren't all cuddles and sunshine. Early in their history they were strictly pacifistic, and also heavily persecuted. After a while, one of the head Gurus decided that if the way to do God's work was to live a good life, and there were oppressors who were committed to preventing you from doing so, then a necessary part of God's work would require, er, helping those oppressors to reincarnate as quickly as possible. Ever since then, they haven't been keen on turning the other cheek, and have had a very strong martial/military culture. There's still a very strong ethic that you shouldn't use violence unless there's absolutely no alternative -- but if you do have to use violence, then you might as well be bloody good at it. But of course the more that one participates in violence, the greyer the morality becomes. So I wouldn't dare wade into the India vs. Khalistan conflict: I'm sure that many of the beefs on both sides are well-founded at this point. But if you can separate the culture and the religion from the politics -- then yeah, it's a really great thing they've got going on there, and I think it's great for the world to have more exposure to it.
> After a while, one of the head Gurus decided that if the way to do God's work was to live a good life, and there were oppressors who were committed to preventing you from doing so, then a necessary part of God's work would require, er, helping those oppressors to reincarnate as quickly as possible.
That is a viewpoint that I believe was ... either missed, ignored or deemed to collide too much with back-then views on national sovereignty after the world wars. Humanity decided to give itself at least a basic set of rules of civilized behavior - think of stuff like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of 1948 or the Hague and Geneva accords on waging war.
But what good are these rules, when there was and is barely any enforcement of them, especially against large/hegemonial powers? The utter majority of war crime tribunals were against African warlords and a couple of the worst actors in Yugoslavia during the 90s collapse/independence wars. Meanwhile, all of the permanent UNSC member countries (especially the US, Russia and China, but also France and the UK) have faced a host of credible war crime or general human rights violation accusations, and so did and do many of their protege countries - in the Western sphere, Turkey is accused of a genocide against the Kurds, Israel with the Palestinians, and on the other side we got accusations of a physical and cultural genocide of Russia against Ukraine, of China against Tibetans and Uyghurs, or Syria's falln regime against everyone but Alawites.
I’ve had langar before. They used to do it at my university in England. It’s a pretty good meal
I saw it in Manchester city centre too
Lovely, this concept predates Sikhism and is called Prasad in Hinduism. If you go to many Sikh or Hindu temples they offer free meals.
Prasad is very different to langar. Langar is a full meal, served to anyone who turns up, no questions asked. Prasad is often sweet, given in much smaller quantities (hardly enough to be a full meal), and almost never served hot.
What does this thread have to do with Hinduism? Always love a shoe-horned hinduism comment. It's my favourite way to spot a hindutva member.
Also, no, it doesn't predate. Or at least, there is no such record of it. What are your sources?
Wow. Hate is unwarranted. Tirumala Anna Prasadam is pretty good. quoting from press release “By the normal standards in the present kitchen 12 huge vessels are steamed to produce rice at the rate of five persons for one kg rice. “But we are geared to cook rice for one to two lakh persons during the Srivari Brahmotsavam at the rate of 400 bags of rice per day”
https://news.tirumala.org/nitya-annadam-free-meals-for-all-2...
more stats here
https://www.tirumala.org/SRIVENKATESWARAANNAPRASADAMTRUST.as...
Anna prasadam is pretty common thing in Hinduism. Read about Akshayapatra foundation which provides free mid day meals to 1000’s of children every single day!
Steve Jobs would walk 7 miles every Sunday to have lunch at Hare Krishna Temple
Upvoted, but please be mindful of the guidelines here: “Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.”
Why the hostility? That’s not what I gathered from their comment. And isn’t it a known fact that quite a few religions stemmed from Hinduism, like Jainism and Buddhism? Just like the other 2 Abrahamic faiths stemming from Judaism.
why the hate? this is what the khalsa extremists were like, many religions have free food to offer
As a practicing Hindu, even I feel your original comment is inaccurate.
There's free food, and then there's langar. The scale, quality and motives are just so different.
thats not true, visit india, or even in the Uk there are many free food hindu outlets like go dharmic etc
[dead]
Prasad, as far as I've seen my whole life (in India and the US), is a single bite of food, rather than being a full meal.
And it's usually the result of you having attended a prayer, rather than "we'll feed anyone a full meal"
The closest thing Hindus do is the Hare Krishna templates globally that also feed anyone who shows up.
Saying Prasada is similar to and predates Langar is like saying Sony Walkman is similar to and predates iPod.
Also temples are extremely diverse and probably less than the 1% of temples offer wholesome meal Prasada similar to Langar while a Gurudwara most certainly will offer Langar.
Every temple iv been to serve foods
It is a nice practice, I experienced it also after some Christian masses.
It's kind of similar. When I was homeless I tried to stay at shelter that had Christian ties. It never worked they always had hours of service and moving from ceremony or room to room which ate time while I needed to look for an apartment. Likewise all of the Christian places would not let me bring my laptop bag without putting it into a large pile of homeless cloths that anyone could take from. It was my only means of earning income and I couldn't allow that so I had to go leave my laptop bag in a storage unit 3 miles away.
But without the forced conversion tactics.
I’ve personally been converted 4 times. All times without my consent to be converted but it was so forceful I learned the 2nd time to just go along with it.
By the 4th I learned to lie.
All I wanted to do was help or just do my own thing.
depends. That wasn't my experience at all, and shouldn't be for anyone.
[flagged]
This is a propaganda comment with all kinds of fallacies. It's all hindutva chest-beating in the name of sikhism. Sikhism has nothing to do with hindutva, and would want no association with it.
For those not in the know, hindutva is a fascist group trying to masquerade as hindus.
Stop being a racist. Read history before talking about other continent issues.
What is the difference between the Hindus and Hindutva. Do you even know the meaning of word?
What's the difference between a right-leaning moderate and a far-right fascist?
I think that probably sums it up for anyone not familiar with terms.
This only shows your ignorance of India and Hindus. Hindutva literally means essence of being a Hindu. What is wrong with that? A billion Hindus with belonging to different sects and micro minorities like Parsi(they also own one of the biggest conglomerate of India) are living here since centuries.
We did not fight a 30 years religious war[0] or exterminated natives of many continents[1][2]. So shove your right-leaning and far right-fasist classification where it belongs.
[0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thirty_Years%27_War#Peace_of_W...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_genocide_in_th...
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocide_of_indigenous_peoples
it would be so nice if i didnt have to cover my head whilst eating at a gurdwara.
Fair! I never considered that covering one’s hair/head in the gurdwara might be difficult or uncomfortable for some people. If you ever want a meal, someone at the gurdwara might be able to load up a plate for you while you wait outside. This isn’t too different from people who take prasad/langar in their cars in Punjab (kind of like a langar drive through).