A friend and I, talking about our respective religions, wondered why some religions are identified by the names of their founders, while others are not.

Christianity clearly evokes the title of Messiah that Jesus acquired. (People often think that Christ was his name, but it comes from Christos meaning "messiah" or savior" in Greek. His name was Jesus. In many Indic languages, he is called Yasu Massih.) Buddhism is obviously named for its founder. Islam is named not for its founder, Mohammed, but for an underpinning of its belief – peace or submission; I have seen this religion also referred to as Mohammedanism. The Bahai faith gets its name from Baha'Ullah, the founder, and Judaism gets the moniker from Judah, the preeminent patriarch of one of the twelve tribes of Israel. Judah was Abraham's great-grandson (i.e., Abraham -- Isaac -- Jacob -- Judah). King David, a descendant of the tribe of Judah, founded a dynasty that ultimately went by the name of his tribe. I really don't know the origin and meaning of the word "Hindu," except as a possible reference to the north Indian River Sindhu. The river's name became corrupted to Indus and the people of the Indus valley came to be known as Hindus.

Sikhism or Sikhi, as Sikhs prefer to call it, is different. The name of the religion has nothing at all to do with the names of the founder-Gurus of the movement. Nanak was the first Guru, but I have never heard this faith called Nanakism. Nor is the name of any of the succeeding nine Gurus ever used to identify the religion, though it is sometimes called the way of Nanak, but never in an institutional sense.

I am aware that one writer, Davinder Singh, has forcefully argued for Sikhism to be viewed as Nanakian philosophy. I don't know if he is aiming to rename the religion. I believe he is taking the lead from the way we identify schools of thought or philosophies; witness the Socratic method, Aristotelian logic, Platonic love or Hegelian philosophy, etc. In any event, Nanakian philosophy would be an inadequate term. It is true that Sikh tradition is, in its essential core, the worldview of Nanak, but the evolution and elaboration of that philosophy to maturity occupied another nine Gurus that followed Nanak during the course of two centuries.

But then another very valid and historically consistent Sikh belief posits that all ten Gurus, from Nanak to Gobind Singh, were in fact different manifestations of the same light of Nanak, and in their message, no differentiation can be made between any of them. That is exactly why they all acted in the name of Nanak, used the eponym Nanak in all of their writings, and are individually identified in Guru Granth only by number in the sequence of their ascension to Guruship. Perhaps it is for this reason that the historian, Hew McLeod, prefers to view Sikhism as the message not of the "Gurus," but the Guru. It is a subtle point that Hew McLeod makes, but it should please Sikhs.

In fact, McLeod feels that the suffix "ism" at the end of religions is not very meaningful; he would like to see Sikhism referred to as "Gurmat." "Gur" refers to Guru and "mat" could be translated as the way or wisdom, making Sikhism the path that hews to Guru's wisdom. Somewhat consistent with all this was an interpretation by a Sikh scholar at a conference, but it did not sit very well with me. He recognized that the Sikh message hews to the teaching of the Guru, and also that the word "Sikh" for the followers of this path is perhaps not easily understood by many, especially if they are non-Sikhs. So he suggested that the Sikh path should be redubbed "Guruism" instead. (I wonder what would the followers then be called? Guruists or Guruites?) Never having heard such a proposition, I was baffled, though many in the audience thought that perhaps the idea was swell. But, as I pondered some more, I realized that the term Guru now no longer suggests only a supremely enlightened teacher, nor does it always speak of the Sikh application of the term. Gurus are now a dime a dozen. One can find a tabla or sitar guru, a guru in the kitchen, or one in the spa. Some might even think of me as a guru of anatomy, because that's what I teach. But when we speak of Guru Nanak or his successor Gurus, the term is very specific and unmatched in its meaning or reverence. So "Guruism" just would not do; it is too generic and unconnected to the message that we label Sikhi.

In fact I think that the word "Sikh" says precisely who we are and how we ought to see ourselves. We usually take this word to be of Sanskrit origin, meaning a student. And what better role for us can there be than as students of life and seekers of truth. This meaning of the word clearly implies that the path is endless, just as a student's lot is never done, and thus the journey becomes the destination. The Sikh scholar, Kapur Singh, argues that the word "Sikh" is of Pali derivation. Etymologically then, its Pali antecedent, "Sikho," is best rendered as a seeker of truth; this is consistent with my take here.

Sikhi is the path of the Sikh Gurus, but it places the onus on us, the followers of that path. Relabeling it Guruism or Nanakism may exalt the founder, but would diminish the essence of the journey and curtail the role of the follower. In the final analysis, it is fitting that the word "Sikhism" places the emphasis on the followers who walk the path. It seems to me that this was exactly the point when Guru Gobind Singh founded the institution of the Khalsa by initiating the first five Sikhs in 1699, and then himself accepting initiation from their hands.

Sikhism is one of the few paths that is defined by the primary character trait of the follower and not by the gigantic, overpowering and looming shadow of the founder.

Note: The author, Inder Jit Singh, is Professor of Anatomy at New York University. He is on the editorial advisory board of the periodical 'The Sikh Review,' Calcutta. I.J. Singh is also the author of three books - 'Sikhs and Sikhism: A View With a Bias,' 'The Sikhs Way: A Pilgrims Progress' and 'Being And Becoming A Sikh.' His fourth book, just released, is entitled 'The World According to Sikhi.'