Kids Corner

Images: Posters from the world war years.

Roundtable

Loose Lips Sink Ships

by I.J. SINGH & T. SHER SINGH

 

 

The following is the topic this week for THE ROUNDTABLE OPEN FORUM # 74 

 

 

Today, we are going to do something that we may well learn to regret.

Then why do it?

Two reasons: because it is necessary and because we find ourselves obsessing about it.

We recently came across the blurb of a program - a national radio conversation on Sikhism - handled by two of our finest scholars on Sikh Studies. We don’t know who had written the blurb but the buck stops with the scholars since they were the focus of the interview.

The blurb, in a brief two lines about Sikhs, describes God in Sikhism as “shapeless and sightless.”   

It left us clueless!

Admittedly, we are not scholars of Religion or English, but this jolted us awake. We know the pitfalls of trying to capture the spirit of our scriptural writing in English. 

But "sightless", as in purblind, blind as a bat, someone without vision in both meanings of the term, undiscerning or groping in darkness? 

"Shapeless", as in amorphous like a blob, baggy, blobby, immature, unfinished, or inchoate?

And then we thought that perhaps our scholars would clear up the mystery with a word or two during discussion. but then the questions were different, the issues remained untouched and our vision stayed unrestored.

Hence this note today.

We hasten to add that we have the greatest respect for our scholars, these in particular. We enjoy the friendship of most of them, these in particular.

But we need to call a spade a spade, and prevent  it from hitting us on the proverbial head.

Words have meaning. Words can become weapons that are sharper than any. We should pay attention to them.

And in this our scholars need to lead. Because they teach and influence students, both formal and lay ones like us. We pick up terms and terminologies from them, which in turn shape our thoughts, formulate our ideas, chisel and sculpt the language in which we express them.

Let us mention two more examples from other academicians.

The magic of gurbani has been described by one scholar as having the following impact on its imbibers: “being struck dumb.” 

Of course, he was pointing to the fact that the reader was left speechless or rendered mute. Dumb-struck might have been better. The word “dumb” standing alone, even "struck dumb",  have other, less fortunate interpretations and connotations. 

Then we point to a remark by another friend and scholar who teaches a university-level course in Sikhism. Some years ago, in countering the attempts to suppress the kirpan, he used the unfortunate expression of describing Sikhs as “a pacifist people.” 

We believe history is unquestionably clear: pacifists they are not, nor have they ever tried to be. Non-violent and peaceful they are, even unto death, until all other peaceful means have clearly been tried and failed.

Sure, it is only a careless choice of words, and no more.

But coming from those who are, and are treated as, opinion leaders, shapers of young minds, it bodes endless baggage for us all.

Just look around you and you will see the flotsam and jetsam of casual, lazy and/or less-than-fully-thought-out usages of language that litter our landscape:

The world knows that Christians go to churches, Jews to synagogues, Muslims to mosques, Hindus to temples ... And Sikhs? Because our mind-shapers shy away from using the correct word, "gurdwara", we continue to struggle with 'temple', 'church', 'Sikh place of worship', and so on.

Muslims have 'mullahs', Jews have 'rabbis', Christians have 'ministers', Hindus have 'pandits'. Sikhs? It's so puzzling! Our brightest minds can be caught referring to our Bhais and Granthis as 'priests', Jathedars as "high priests", or even likened to a 'pope'! The Jathedar of the Akal Takht has been termed the "High Priest"! 

Our scholars are still struggling between "symbols' and 'articles of faith'. Why not "kakkaars"?

The Punj Pyare. The world knows nothing of them ... because we call them, variously, the Five Beloved Ones ... the Loved Ones, the Cherished ones ... the Elders ... etc., etc.

Why do OUR own books in English, our own spokespersons, refer to a dagger, a knife, a sword ... and not a kirpan!

Why do we refer to a Karra as a 'steel bracelet' or a bangle?

You hear frustrated voices galore over why we stick to using the term "God" - which certainly does not reflect the Sikh concept at all - instead of "Waheguru"?

Since when did Sardars and Sardarnis get reduced to 'Singhs' and 'Singhnis'? By us, not by the enemy.

And here's the clincher.

Not too long ago, one of us - (T. Sher Singh) - was in India, and found himself in a studio, being taped for a TV interview.

The host was, yes, a Sardar!

The guest ... was a Sardar.

Lights go on, the music begins to jingle, the floor director gives the cue ... and the host begins: "I have the pleasure today of bringing to you Shri T. Sher Singh ..."

"CUT", yelled the irate guest, after collecting his jaw from the floor.

"S-H-R-I"?

 I can see why the desis call their PM "Shri Manmohan Singh" ... they are either ignorant or mischievous. But why do we?

It's carelessness, coupled with a dollop of intellectual laziness. Again, there's no doubt in our mind that there's nothing more insidious than that on the part of our scholars.

And it is true, we all make mistakes, and for the two of us, ours are legion. 

This rant might lose us the few friends we have. That’s not our desired goal. We wish our scholars would pay attention to words and never lose sight of the power they wield, or of how they rule our minds. 

If they don’t, who will?


THE ROUNDTABLE OPEN FORUM

We invite readers to comment on the above. Please do not remain dumb-struck!


August 15, 2011 

Conversation about this article

1: I.J. Singh (New York, U.S.A.), August 15, 2011, 10:21 AM.

And why do we - particularly Sikhs - continue to refer to the orchestrated pogroms of 1984 as "riots"? It is an obvious one that we overlooked, while citing the most glaring examples. The world knows that there was neither spontaneity nor reciprocity to those mass killings.

2: Gurdev Singh (Columbus,Ohio, U.S.A.), August 15, 2011, 11:40 AM.

To the fortunate jagiasu-s amongst us, He is seen everywhere and in everything, and thus he is of infinite forms and shapes. Very well said in the article. Not-well-thought-out words do harm, even when merely creating ambiquity.

3: Yuktanand Singh (MI, U.S.A.), August 15, 2011, 12:59 PM.

Some slips occur due to a lack of awareness, not necessarily ignorance or malice. I once used "shri" for sant ji in an article in 1998 posted on www.sikhs.org. I did not know my mistake until a devout friend objected to it. We use "Sri" for Guru Granth Sahib, then why should it bother us when it is used for us? But I agreed with my devout friend. The prefix 'shri' (or Mr.) when addressing another Sikh indicates disregard of our identity. Some young Sikhs are just not aware, others ignore it intentionally. I am proud to see that you did not allow it on TV. The other slips discussed above are much more serious, though.

4: Tarsem Singh Ubhi (Newport Pagnell, United Kingdom), August 15, 2011, 1:28 PM.

I am no scholar but here is an opinion - in the translations of gurbani when words like har, goeindh, gopaal, paarbrham or parmesar are translated to the word 'Lord' all the time, the historical/ background/ time significance in which that name may have been originally used is lost. These numerous names referring to Waheguru in Gurmukhi should be retained in their original form in the translations.

5: Chintan Singh (San Jose, California, U.S.A.), August 15, 2011, 1:56 PM.

On the same thought here, we need to start pronouncing ourselves as Sikhs and not 'seeks'. I have noticed 'seek' often deteriorates into 'sheek', and then very quickly 'sheikh' ... and there you go with we Sikhs being confused with Arabs! That being said, however, although agreed that we should call a Karra a karra and not a bracelet or bangle, but how do you explain the karra or kirpan to an English speaking person? With globalization and the world becoming a huge "village", English is the most commonly spoken language. If an English-only speaking person wants to know more about Sikhism, how else do you define or explain a karra or kirpan without calling it a steel bangle or sword/ dagger. I realize how translation of a native Punjabi word into English can mislead, but don't have an answer to prevent this from happening. Maybe a class or putting together an online glossary by our scholars on translating/ explaining key Sikh words into English would be helpful.

6: Raminder Singh (U.S.A.), August 15, 2011, 7:18 PM.

I think it is all a question of educating the public. First, we should be proud of our heritage and should not hide behind translations. If we insist on being called Sardar instead of Shri, refer to the kirpan as kirpan and not as a dagger, and call granthi a granthi and not a priest, people will learn the correct terminology. After all, the Americans and other western world guys do understand sharia, rabbi, madrasa and qazi. These words are never translated and have been used in most of the western world. We have to get rid of our complexes or our individuality will be distorted.

7: Yuktanand Singh (MI, U.S.A.), August 15, 2011, 11:27 PM.

I agree completely with Raminder Singh (#6) above. But we need to avoid the extremes. An article intended for Western readership would be unreadable if we did not use some English equivalents. There are many shades of grey here. For example, I would avoid an English substitute for Guru, Guru Granth Sahib, Gurdwara, Karrah Parshaad, Rumaalla, Kirpan or Ardaas, just to name a few. But for expediency, I do not feel bad calling the Panj Piyare the Five Beloved or my dastaar a turban, until people have learned what I mean. I feel that it is okay to address my 'jorray' as shoes!

8: H.S. Vachoa (U.S.A.), August 15, 2011, 11:56 PM.

Should we also avoid using the term "Sikhism"? Maybe ... Sikhi!

9: Baljit Singh Pelia (Los Angeles, California, U.S.A. ), August 16, 2011, 1:24 AM.

I have observed the gurdwara bhais and kirtaniyas refer to addressing the sangat as Stage'. Massa Ranghar once tried to use Harmandar Sahib as a stage, and the rest is history. Also written on the offering golak is "Maya golak which pao", it would be more appropriate to say "Bhetaa petee which pau ji"

10: R. Singh (Canada), August 16, 2011, 10:45 AM.

We definitely need to go a long way with our translations and resulting meanings and impact on our own upcoming generations as well as other English speakers. I was totally aghast at seeing a sign recently at a major gurdwara in the Toronto (Canada) area, which reads: "Sikh place of worship". Most people will contend with this as a lesser evil, for another of our gurdwaras has trees painted saffron in the parking lot. We seem to be taking a nose dive with our sense of our surroundings and the impact of our words and deeds on the world around us.

11: Dr. Pargat Singh (Nottingham, United Kingdom), August 16, 2011, 5:22 PM.

I agree that words are important and that as far as possible we should call a spade a spade. That's why I objected to one of our learned scholars in a recent sikhchic.com article repeatedly referring to Guru Nanak as 'Nanak'. If they (mentioning no names) don't get it right, who will?

12: Baldev Singh (Bradford, United Kingdom), August 16, 2011, 6:29 PM.

Bertrand Russell, the great British philosopher who once tore apart Christianity with simple, rational arguments, scolded the Sikhs that "they will never be forgiven for not bringing out in broad daylight, the greatness of their Scriptures.". Many of our 'scholars' have little in-depth understanding of actual Sikh practice; amongst them, many also wallow in unnecessary distractions, such as caste-related goofinesses. So, who's going to tell the world about a system with which they have not got much in common?

13: Prakash Singh Bagga (India), August 17, 2011, 6:34 AM.

To date we have been trying to understand gurbani through the lens of other philosophies. Our scholars need to go to the source and then approach their task of translation and interpretation fearlessly, by ensuring that the original intent and meaning is not diluted or lost.

14: Manjeet Shergill (Singapore), August 17, 2011, 7:09 AM.

Can someone please explain the meaning of the term "Tat Khalsa? Thanks.

15: Prakash Singh Bagga (India), August 17, 2011, 11:34 AM.

The word "Tat" or "tutt" is an adjective. It refers to a state which cannot be divided further. Such as in a scientific 'elememt'. Or as in the Ultimate Being. Also, as in the 'core' of something.

16: Prakash Singh Bagga (India), August 21, 2011, 12:11 PM.

A reminder: part of being meticulously careful and accurate in our translations involves giving due weight to the vowels used in gurbani.

17: Harbans Lal (Dallas, Texas, U.S.A.), August 27, 2011, 12:25 PM.

Yes, H.S. Vachoa ji (#8), the term 'Sikhism' is misleading. Sikhi or Gurmat will be the right description of our faith.

Comment on "Loose Lips Sink Ships"









To help us distinguish between comments submitted by individuals and those automatically entered by software robots, please complete the following.

Please note: your email address will not be shown on the site, this is for contact and follow-up purposes only. All information will be handled in accordance with our Privacy Policy. Sikhchic reserves the right to edit or remove content at any time.