u/Fun_Top6478

Was forming a separate religion the only—or necessarily the best—way for Guru Nanak to address the problems he identified?

I’m asking this as a philosophical question, not an attack on Sikhism. I’m not questioning Guru Nanak’s sincerity or whether concerns like caste and ritualism were genuine.

My question is about the solution: Indian traditions already had thinkers such as Adi Shankaracharya, Kabir, Ravidas, etc. who challenged or reinterpreted aspects of caste, ritualism and religious practice through philosophical or reform movements.

So could Guru Nanak’s concerns have been addressed through an internal reform/philosophical movement rather than institutionalizing a distinct religion?

And if some of the problems he opposed, such as caste distinctions, later reappeared within Sikh society, does that raise a legitimate question about whether religious institutionalization was the most effective solution? (used ai for formatting)

Was forming a separate religion the only—or necessarily the best—way for Guru Nanak to address the problems he identified?

I’m asking this as a philosophical question, not an attack on Sikhism. I’m not questioning Guru Nanak’s sincerity or whether concerns like caste and ritualism were genuine.

My question is about the solution: Indian traditions already had thinkers such as Adi Shankaracharya, Kabir, Ravidas, etc. who challenged or reinterpreted aspects of caste, ritualism and religious practice through philosophical or reform movements.

So could Guru Nanak’s concerns have been addressed through an internal reform/philosophical movement rather than institutionalizing a distinct religion?

And if some of the problems he opposed, such as caste distinctions, later reappeared within Sikh society, does that raise a legitimate question about whether religious institutionalization was the most effective solution?