Talk:Sikh gurus

Tree diagrams

There should be a link to the family tree article, I would hate finding something I couldn´t understand in an encyclopedia.

reverted

I reverted this page because of vandalism by 86.151.156.134 [[kl good 2 not NOT!

Page moves

On 7 May Jattlife121 moved this page to The Eleven Sikh Gurus with the justification "Fix grammar"; not only does this not make sense, but the move was not discussed anywhere beforehand, but the new title did not match the title name policy. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:29, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Gurus has to be with capital G. Furthermore, Sikh Gurus doesn't make sense. For example you say "The Ten Commandments" not the commandments. I am disputing this, Theres nothing wrong with The Eleven Sikh Guru's. I feel like you are creating a dispute out of nothing. Jattlife121 (talk) 17:20, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

Jattlife121, I refer you to WP:COMMONNAME: please find reliable secondary sources which consistently refer to "The Eleven Sikh Gurus", and then prove that that term is used more frequently than "Sikh gurus". ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:56, 9 May 2023 (UTC)

The tree diagram

The title should respectfully be, "Sikh Guru Succession and Lineage", in my opinion. The heading too. Learned Sikh scholars may know better. Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Waheguru Ji Ke Fateh. SJ5x5 (talk) 12:39, 20 October 2024 (UTC)

Guruship of the Khalsa, known as "Guru Panth"

While seldom evoked today, it remains as a form of the Guru, recognized as such by the principal Sikh religious body, the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee in their official Sikh code of conduct, the Sikh Rehat Maryada.

Further reading: Khalsa#Guruship of the Khalsa (Guru Panth)

Please do not remove information on the Guru Panth without consensus. Ample reliable sources have been cited in the article regarding it. MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 00:37, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

If the Guru Granth Sahib is considered 11th by many, should the table be renumbered to have it as 11 and Guru Panth as N/A? Or both as 11, with a foot note?

Alternatively, is there a source that numbers Guru Granth Sahib as 12, and notes the numbering explicitly as something variable? IndigoManedWolf (talk) 00:43, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

@IndigoManedWolf - The human gurus have been presented in chronological order. Continuing in that light for the two non-human gurus, the Guru Panth (communal guru) and the Guru Granth (scriptural guru), they are numbered #11 and #12. The Guru Panth was established in 1699 (formalization of the Khalsa Panth by the last human guru), preceding the guruship bestowal upon the Guru Granth in 1708. Thus, the Guru Panth existed before the Guru Granth institution. Many mainstream sources do not list it in their typical chronological "Sikh gurus list" due to it being extremely overshadowed by the prevailing Guru Granth institution since the 19th century onwards but it was prevalent in historical Sikhism, such as in the form of the Sarbat Khalsa. SikhNet, probably the most popular Sikh website on the net, published an article on the topic, . Basics of Sikhi, probably the most pre-eminent Sikh missionary organization in the English-language in the West, also notes the twelve gurus of Sikhism in its publications, such as here , quote "There was an unbroken line of Ten human Gurus from 1469 to 1708. All the Gurus are seen as the same light, mirroring the One. In 1708, Eternal Guruship was bestowed upon Guru Granth Sahib Ji (scripture) and Guru Khalsa Panth (collective of initiated Sikhs)." They also published a video-series on all the Sikh gurus, with two videos being dedicated to the Guru Panth: ; . Furthermore, a plethora of citations have been given in the article discussing the Guru Panth institution. Further reading: . MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 01:12, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

I have no disagreement about the existence or validity of the Guru Granth; all I am saying is that we shouldn't be doing WP:OR, and that includes such things as numbering when that disagrees with any reference to numbering. I agree that while there is logic to the numbering currently present, that it is however at odds with what sources mentioning numbering state, and that we should not be at odds with reliable sources. Either we should have a source to back up the numbering (and that should explicitly mention the numbering), or we should do something so that we are not imposing a numbering that doesn't exist in RS.

Also, based on the Basics of Sikhi quote, I'd think numbering them both 11 might be the answer. IndigoManedWolf (talk) 02:12, 24 January 2026 (UTC)

@IndigoManedWolf - I understand your concerns. The SikhNet article lists the Guru Panth as the 11th guru and the Guru Granth as the 12th, since they are going by chronological order (which the article here follows as well). The Basics of Sikhi article makes a minor error, stating that both the Guru Panth and Guru Granth were established in 1708, which in-actuality the Guru Granth had been established in 1708 whilst the Guru Panth had actually been established earlier in 1699. The SikhNet article clears it up by saying: “ The Guru Khalsa, the Panth, is the 11th Guru. The Guru Granth is the 12th. The 11th and 12th Gurus exist in perpetuity.” MaplesyrupSushi (talk) 15:38, 24 January 2026 (UTC)