The Shrinking Boundaries of Sikhism

Purity of faith when exercised properly means appropriate regard for other's faiths, anything less is impure in entireity.
Those who have faith do not inflict upon believers of other faiths.

Dear Reader:

The footnote [1] in referred to in the body of the article is appears as the italicised note at the bottom, except that it is truncated. The complete footnote is as follows:

“In the introduction to their The Invasion of Religious Boundaries, a
sustained rebuttal of The Construction of Religious Boundaries, Jasbir Singh
Mann, Surinder Singh Sodhi and Gurbakhsh Singh Gill characterised Oberoi’s
work in the following way:
Clumsy distortions, mindless anthropological constructions and
assumptions, producing ignominious forged postures, sacrilegious
statements about mystic Gurus, effectless effort of a bland,
blunted, unattached, constricted, shallow, pathetic Oberoi has
produced a disjointed cynical, conscienceless and unscrupulous
book … to attack the independent Sikh Identity … In writing this
book, he has shown his pathological identification with
Eurocentric paradigms, and has attempted to bring nihilistic
depersonalisation by biting the hands that fed him.21�

Matloob:

Is this a reaction to the article or a general statement?

dost,

Truly insightful article. Some of my relatives are Hindus and other Sikhs, and others follow both religions - and this article helps me understand how the two religions are so closely intertwined with each other.

However, reading the first para of your article I got the impression that you are going to talk more about the origins and politics of that incident rather than in general religious terms. Inspite of that, thanks for writing this.

On the surface of it; this article does seem neutral without any judgment.

However, when you view an alternative perspective, it does present the picture as if Sikhs have had no definitions and were left in the doldrums, sort of half-Hindu, half-Sikh which could go either way. Fits in the definition of RSS/BJP.

No Panth can survive with these loose definitions and does require firm boundaries.

This revivalism and de-lineation was not given by “Singh Sabhas� or "hard-liners".
Explicit stand around Sikhi and its definitions were clearly given by Sikh Gurus - Guru Arjan, Guru HarGobind and Guru Gobind Singh Jee.

Not worshipping idols, and condemning Hindu way of life was shunned from the start. There are writings of the Gurus around that(not necessarily condemning Hindu Gods but their futility)

During the revival period of post Sikh Sovereignty (Banda Bahadur/Ranjit Singh); Hindu Sects and Arya Samajis and other vocal anti-Sikh people wanted Sikhs to disappear.

Singh Sabhas simply reminded people of old traditions and brought defunct people back to life.

I know that this debate will go on for-ever with no definitive conclusion until::

1) Sikhs disappear from India as an entity, at the present trend it is a very realistic view. For reference look at our most popular Sikh man(lately) MMSingh, his family is the last breed of Sikhi from his tree. Khushwant Singh, another famous Sikh, is the last one in his family free, so is Gopal Singh and the list goes on and on.
All of these Sikhs are the most respected Sikhs in the world and represent to the outsiders what Sikhs are, and their progeny is not Sikh. Hindus love such like Sikhs because they do not protect/assert Sikh values.

2) Alternatively, Sikhs define their own values (afterall Khalsa has been ordained to make Political decisions on their own by its founder). Question to be asked his how will Hindus in India react to Sikhs asserting themselves, will they be viewed as Sovereign within Indian framework or isolated as Khalistanis and destroyed.

Next 20 years or so will be very decisive for Sikhs.

delhiwala#5:

I did not expect you to like the thesis of this article, and that's okay. But one cannot rewrite/reinterpret history. The tenth guru did announce the end of the line of Gurus but I do not know if he or any other Guru told their disciples not to worship any other deity. However, this is not the issue that I am raising; the issue is did they ask anyone that doing so would make them an un-sikh?

I consider Sikhi to be a lot stronger than you seem to do; it survived oppression by the Mughals and the vested hindu interests affected by the campaign against rituals; it can certainly survive against any overt or covert attacks by the RSS or their likes.

Why do you say that the Sikh line has ended with MMS or Khushwant Singh? If what you say is correct, it is probably because of the rigid definition which excludes them from being called a Sikh and presents the real long term danger.

in my personal experience sikhism is increasing, at least by one.

RSS wala told me once that due to absence of threat-perception to the hindoos, RSS membership is on the decline. i wonder if this is relevant to sikhism too. e.g. varun gandhi is no sikh.

Sikhism is a religion that is adopting to changing times and place. I have not met a single Sikh who says he is no longer a Sikh, even though he may have cut hair and shaved. A couple of my friends were part of the initiative to get their kids to promote wearing of turban, but that did not go farther.

I think Sikhism is more of a spritual religion, less ritualistic.

jang#7:

Varun Gandhi is not a sikh because he is a Gandhi. In general,it is also true that children of sikh women married to Hindu men are not Sikhs even when they are married according to Sikh rituals, i.e., Anand Karaj. I personally know of quite a few such cases. But the children of Sikh men married to Hindu wives are generally raised as Sikhs.

Some questions from hardline Sikhs I need to know the answer to.

(1) When Guru Gobind Singh baptised the panj-piare, why didn't he immediately declare that all the thousands of other Sikhs in attendance, were no longer Sikhs, if he didn't accept pluralism and heterodoxy as a defining trait of the Sikh community?

(2) If Sikhs today are taking it upon themselves to do what Guru Gobind Singh himself did not do, and exclude all those non-orthodox Sikhs from the Sikh community, it is incredible to think why people concerned about the Sikh community and their welfare are not alarmed by the attempts to continually exclude people from the fold of Sikhism until all that remains are a small number, maybe 10% of Sikhs today who would qualify under the new rules.

By the way, those questions are rhetorical. I already know the answers, and the answers are that hardline Sikhs can't answer them.

Re: # 9 DM,

I have many comments and will cover one at a time :).

To start with it's an excellent article. I agree with most of what you have said.

I disagree however with # 9 comment. My father was raised as a punjabi hindu (and hence i have many hindu relatives) and my mom was a pukki sikhani. Not only were we raised as kesadhari sikhs, my father also became kesadhari kattar sikh. It all depends upon how exposed folks are to sikh values and history.

In general, as I have said many times before, sikhs need to expand their base (quanity is very important in this day and age). This is not to rule over the world but to -

1. fullfil their mission of crusading against caste system and rituals that has victimized indians for centuries. Rest of india has finally awakened to this and we need to celebrate this and facilitate the process with right attitude and behavior. More on that later.

2. we need numbers for our own physical protection (1984?) as well as protection of the faith. I agree with some folks who say that sikhism can easily go the way of budhism, if we leave to our lazy crazy ritualistic indian society to its own devices. Previous life/next life brain washing has permanently impacted lowest strata of the masses (even if middle and upper class becomes westernized or adopts modern aggressive activist life style, their rate of growth is going to be easily swamped by the growth of those poor with older beliefs).

If this is all acceptable to many sikhs, why are they worried about getting mainstreamed? Let me put those thoughts in my next post.

from my blog:

Baba Nanak started sikhism to liberate people from ritualism and present day sikhi is being strangulated with new rituals by the same people who call themselves to be followers of baba Nanak. Untill this paradox is resolved, sikhi is doomed.

Continued from #12 - If this is all acceptable to many sikhs, why are they worried about getting mainstreamed?

IMHO -

1. Many sikhs feel that hindu india is too big and will never incorporate values they hold so dear. In fact they think sikhs will become converted back to lazy caste ridden society because ultimately 2% folks have to fit in with the values of the majority for their own survival and prosperity.

2. Sikhs feel that hindus will not give them credit for their contribution or their values on an instituttional basis (not on an individual basis). examples they cite - how many defence weapons, think tanks, missiles etc. have been named after the bravest of the brave sikh warriors (ranjeet singh, hari singh nalwa, baba deep singh and so many others). The western oriented elite (with a desi mask) that rules knows all about western history and heroes but not much about the fierce sikh struggle for oppressed indians when there was no CNN and fox to cover the brutalities).

3. Arya Samaj is mentioned frequently as an organization that made its mark around 1860-80 after punjab had become "free" from both sikh and muslim rule. And since then, many sikhs believe, they have taken lead in insulting sikh gurus and values and their goal is to bring sikhs back to the pure original religion like budhism was many centuries back.

4. Sikhs cite punjabi suba and language issues they faced during 1960s and how their center/state power sharing struggle was twisted by Indira to essentially "destroy" them.

I personally do not know all the details about all these issues and would apprecaite what others think about these rantings. Also, Sikhs are not blameless in most of these areas. More on that stuff in next post :)

The worst dhakosala of our times has been the assumption that externalities like five K-s can define Sikhism in present modern times.

The era of 5-k's is over and Sikhs only need to dwell deeper into the Shabads of Gurus and bow down to the AKAAL PURUKH who is also Hari, Narayan, Gobind and Shiva.

All this attempt to Talibanize Sikhism into wearing of kesh and following the "Maryada" code that is similar to Islamic-sunnah-code is the result of Communal-Politics within Sikh community.


It is time Sikhism became more spiritual and less of dhakosala like the Gurus wanted.

Re: # 13

doctor saheb,

Sikhi is infact being strangulated by the existing 'rituals' promoted by SGPC and other political committes.