History
Ek Sikh Barabar Sava Lakh
by Dr. DIPANKAR GUPTA
Sikhs may be just two per cent of India's population, but in their self-image and deportment, it is as if they constitute two hundred per cent of India's one billion. As the saying goes: "Ek Sikh barabar sava lakh" ("Each Sikh is a Legion"). Even during the worst days of the Partition, Sikhs never felt insecure about their religion, as their Hindu counterparts did, and continue to do.
Why then, does a small, insignificant sect like the Dera Sacha Sauda, that does not even claim to be Sikh, get mainstream Akalis and a large number of everyday Sikhs so hot and bothered? This Baba is no medieval tyrant and martyrdom of any kind would be thoroughly wasted on him. He is a minor figure, whose demonising by the Akalis raised his stature and downgraded their gurus who gave up their lives in far more glorious battlefields.
The question then is: How did the Sikhs suddenly turn so insecure? When did it happen and where were we all looking? Or did the lights suddenly go off in the changing room?
The original Panthic Party, which later morphed into the Akali Dal after 1947, never evinced such worries either, and those were very difficult times. They regularly participated with the Congress before Independence. The party even supplied the Congress with a stable of leaders, from Pratap Singh Kairon to Swaran Singh. On election campaigns in undivided Punjab, the Panthic Party frequently displayed the Congress symbol along with its own. On no occasion did any of this to-and-fro movement from the Panthic Party and back threaten Sikhism. Nor did the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee declare Kairon or Swaran Singh, or any of the others who took their political blood lines to the Congress, apostates or tankhaiyas. Sikhism had that much confidence.
In 1899, when Sardar Kahn Singh Nabha wrote Hum Hindu Nahin (We are not Hindus), he did not castigate any other religion, but just said the plain truth. The Sikhs were not Hindus and let the record state the facts. It was not as if he was prompted to write this tract because of the perceived fear that Hinduism was eating up Sikhism. In this sense, he was not the mirror opposite of Swami Dayanand, who took every other religion, including Sikhism, as a threat to the Hindu faith.
Nabha's interjection was to remind his readers of the symbolic energies at the heart of his faith, without deriding non-Sikhs, nor, even for a moment, hoping to proselytise other religions to his own. Even the Singh Sabhas and Chief Khalsa Diwan of that period were intent on crafting a separate Sikh identity and not in impressing their own thought prints on their immediate religious neighbours.
Interestingly, in the sixty years after Independence, the Akali Dal has never used the Partition to evoke partisanship the way Hindu parties, and sadly, the Congress even, have done from time to time. This is indeed quite remarkable. Sikhs, too, had suffered along with Hindus in their migration to east Punjab and beyond. And yet, unlike Hindus, the Partition is history for Sikhs, and not a source of political energies.
When I was working with re-settled rural Sikh refugees in Punjab and Haryana, what struck me the most was that they found my questions, which recalled the Partition, quite stupid. So many of these Sikhs told me to move on and not keep looking over my shoulder for monsters and chimeras of the past.
That was such a relief. Hindu refugees, in general, were still agonising over the Partition and related stirring tales of their experiences during those times. Most of this recall was highly adorned, as my Hindu respondents in the early 1990s were either babies or playing in the mud in knickers when 1947 happened. Some post-Partition Hindu families even held prayer meetings to solemnly remember the day they were ousted from their homes. I found none of this among Sikh refugees. It is no surprise then, that even a sectarian party like the Akali Dal has no use for the Partition as a leavening political agent.
Later, during the bad days of Khalistan, a large number of Sikhs felt that they were humiliated by the Indian state, but on no account did they believe that their religion was under threat. Khalistanis were, of course, baying to the contrary from the margins, but an overwhelming majority of Sikhs did not politically side with these secessionists, though they were widely admired for giving the hated agents of the government a tough time. This is not an "a-ha" moment, for, in spite of the trauma post-Bluestar, Sikhs were willing to look ahead the instant Prime Minister V.P. Singh visited Punjab with a healing balm.
The Khalistani years, if one may call them that, however demonstrated that in times of crisis, it was not as if there were Sikhs and Sikhs. Regardless of caste and origin, all Sikhs came together. This is where the difference lies when we come to the Sikh over-reaction to Dera Sacha Sauda. There are now Sikhs and Sikhs and the lines are drawn along the grooves of caste.
Most of the animus against Baba Ram Rahim came from the Malwa region of Punjab, where Jat Sikhs are politically dominant. It does not matter really if Jats vote Congress today and Akali tomorrow; it would always be a fight between "lions". Dera Sacha Sauda trampled on this territory, by bringing in non-Jats to kick up dust and spoil the Jat-versus-Jat slugfest.
This is why Baba Ram Rahim was so profoundly despised in Jat-dominated Akali circles. It was not because he was undermining Sikhism, so much as using his "low caste" followers to defeat Jats in their own lair that made Baba Ram Rahim such a hated poster-boy for the Akalis. If the Congress had won without his support, that would still have been acceptable.
It is not true, as the Akalis allege, that in the advertisement put out by Baba Ram Rahim he dressed like Guru Gobind Singh. His turban did not have a kalgi (plume), he was stirring Rooh Afza (or something pink) with a ladle and not with a sword (which is Khalsa tradition), and furthermore, he was wearing pink and not blue, not even white. No icon of Guru Gobind Singh can ever be depicted in that colour. Chhatrapati Shivaji's popular imagery looks closer to Guru Gobind Singh than this pink spectacle.
And yet many Sikhs blindly believed the Akalis when they said that Baba Ram Rahim was imitating Guru Gobind Singh and thus, mocking Sikhism. The majority of such Sikhs did not bother to verify the facts, as they were primed to believe anything against him. It was their Jatness, not their Sikhness, that Baba Ram Rahim deeply hurt. In the 1980s, Hindus, too, eagerly believed the tale that the Anandpur Sahib Resolution was secessionist. The drive to hate always numbs the better senses.
At the end of the day, what is most depressing is that Sikhs are becoming caste-ridden, and more and more like Hindus. If this trend continues, then Sikhism will probably find its greatest threat from within and not from figures clad in baby pink.
Dipankar Gupta is professor of social sciences at Jawaharlal Nehru University, New Delhi.
[Courtesy: The Hindustan Times]
Conversation about this article
1: Harinder (Pune, India), July 27, 2007, 4:15 AM.
Farming "races" that are giving up their vocation are indeed suffering a decline. Those of us in traditional farming communities (such as the Jutts) who give up farming are, sooner or later, condemened to extinction. The Jutt farmer's culture and genome is safe as long as he tills his land.
2: Ruby Kaur (Oxford, England), July 27, 2007, 11:57 AM.
First of all, Sikhi is not synonymous with a single caste who deem the health of the panth to be what is in the interest of their caste. Such an idea is, objectively speaking, repulsive in its implications. Secondly, the Jutt farmers have to learn how to cope with the modern world. If farming is declining, they have to train themselves to gain skills in other fields, just like everyone else in India, Africa, Asia, or Latin America has to in order to survive, compete and flourish in the 21st Century. Those who act as if the world owes them a living only have themselves to blame when they fall behind or fail in comparison to others.
3: Tejwant (U.S.A.), July 27, 2007, 12:52 PM.
Till we Sikhs understand the concept of Miri-Piri and make it our second nature by living it with every breath we take, we will keep on facing challenges: a life of Sikhi is based on an internal manifestation. It is not a man-made, papier-mache facade concocted by our own manmat. Once the internal side of Sikhi is tended to, the external becomes seamlessly easy.
4: I.J. Singh (New York, U.S.A.), July 30, 2007, 8:11 AM.
Dipankar Gupta hits the right note often but, at times, he does not touch on the whole story. There is much more to the many examples he cites than meets the eye. Perhaps not all the reactions of the Sikhs emerged from a perceived sense of insecurity; more likely there was, at times, a direct attack on Sikh identity, ethos or principles. The Congress party was a political party. Therefore, the joining of the movement by Swaran Singh, Baldev and the like was not a threat to the religion; hence no reason to react. But when Bhai Kahn Singh (Nabha) published his classic "Hum Hindu Nahi(n)," it was in direct response to a booklet titled, "Hum Hindu Hai(n)." There can be no more obvious attack on Sikh identity. Dayanand had a checkered relationship with Sikhs. Sikhs encouraged and supported him until he turned against Sikhism and its founder Guru Nanak. Yes, in its earlier days, the Congress Party was not anti-Sikh. In Indira Gandhi's days, it had become so. Its promotion of the Nirankaries, coupled with what the Sikhs recognized as economic injustices, and the demeaning of Sikh identity during and after the Asiad Games, perhaps added the larger amount of fuel to the fire of Khalsitan. It is not surprising for small minorities to remain hypersenstitive, and Sikhs would fare better if they stay attached to the teaching of courage and "Chardi Kalaa" that lie at the core of the Sikh message. But one cannot easily escape the idea that considerable onus lies on the majority and the government as well for the sorry state of affairs. Dipankar Gupta's is a thoughtful piece that deserves sober analysis and meaningful discussion. It is much appreciated.
5: Jas (Australia), July 30, 2007, 8:35 PM.
There is no such thing as a jutt Sikh or a non-jutt Sikh, even though there are some who do demote themselves from sardari and call themselves jutts, or ramgarhias, or khatris, or bedis ... As for this Baba ... he is not as benign as you think he is. But, life has a way of ironing out such blips ... let's wait and see.
6: Satvir (Boston, U.S.A.), August 01, 2007, 10:02 AM.
Reading this piece brought to mind the nirankari days. I associate this dera baba with the nirankari fiasco more than I do it with the Congress. Its just like I.J. Singh said in his comment: Congress at that time wasn't anti-sikh. Or certainly, it wasn't overtly anti-Sikh. So, the Sikhs siding with them is not the same as Sikhs siding with this chap now. He is but a clone of Gurbachan, the nirankari.
7: Mandeep Singh (U.S.A.), August 01, 2007, 5:52 PM.
Just to correct another comment which says there is nothing like a "jutt-Sikh" or a "non-jutt Sikh". Please go back and check out some of the Sikhs around you: there are people who seem to draw more self-esteem by calling themselves jutt-Sikh or ramgarhia-Sikh or khatri-Sikh than the full glory of being a SIKH!
8: Sam Singh (U.S.A.), August 01, 2007, 6:27 PM.
The Sikh community never was, and isn't now scared of anything. The problem today, though, is that those involved in current-day SGPC, Shiromani Akali Dal and the like, have become selfish and self-centred. They do not seem to care for, and don't seem to even remember, what our Gurus taught us. The jathedars and the complete bureaucracy of officials, all the way from the President and down, have run away from their duties both as Sikhs and as required of them through their salaried jobs. They have become the new "masands". All I want to do is remind them that they too, like the masands of old, will one day be held accountable by the Guru.
9: Ameek Singh (U.S.A.), August 01, 2007, 7:58 PM.
We, as the Khalsa, have proved to be resilient and in Chardi Kalaa over our entire history. It's good to hear that when this professor interviewed Sikhs about their displacement after partition, they talked about the future and not bitterly about the past. However, that same spirit seems to be lacking in the sangat today. Although this author did not go into great detail about the "Khalistan movement", I think it is something that needs to be addressed. Our Guru's legacy was to never take anyone else's land for power or money; we fought simply for our rights and our fair share. We blame the Indian governent for their crimes in the unforgivable acts of 1984. This is true that it was indeed entirely their fault, but we now also need to look forward as to what has to be done to resolve the issues at hand. Our Gurus had to live through 1984-like scenerios on a regular basis - but they never built a "Great Wall of China" around Punjab. I would never deny that the actions of the 1984 politicians and other governmental authorities were attrocious and unacceptable in the highest order. All I want to say is that we should remain relentless in our pursuit of justice re those wrongs. Also, in addition, the author says at the end of the article that Sikhs are becoming more and more like Hindus by increasingly giving into the evils of a caste-ridden culture. This isn't somebody else's fault; it is our own shortcoming. It's a shame. So, we need to meet this challenge head-on, and clean our own house, while we also do other things.
10: Simran Singh (Gurgaon, India), August 01, 2007, 9:04 PM.
Singhs R Kings.
11: S.S. (New Delhi, India), August 02, 2007, 1:02 AM.
It is true: if you look around, it is the caste practices that are taking us away from the tenets on which Sikhism was built. I am located not far from Punjab and I see how these old customs are dividing society. I have been asked several times about my "other name" (which I don't use) so that people could associate me with a particular caste! Even if you check out matrimonial ads, you would see what I mean. We are indeed becoming, God forbid, more like Hindus! What is so sad is the fact that people have again started associating stereotypes with different castes, and the divisions are enormous. One can look at the new Punjabi songs to see its implications. I have friends who have begun to identify themselves as nirankaris, jutts, ramgarhias, khatris, etc. more readily than they would as Sikhs. I have been to most parts of India, and where I felt the least respected has been in Punjab, even though I am in my own land. I respect namdharis the way they have preserved the teachings of the Gurus, or at least most of them (since some of the practices are questionable and blasphemous, of course). They don't use caste surnames, they stay away from intoxicants, they have simple marriages (in fact, the most satisfying wedding experience I've ever witnessed). The lesson to be learnt: it is as easy as following the simple, straight path of Sikhi. However, I believe what is needed most right now is awareness and education. I feel an irony in this: we have always been the harbinger of good things in Indian society. Our food, culture, habits and language have all been adopted by the country at large. On the one hand, I feel threatened that something which was "mine", unique to me, is now so common. Most of the country prepares the food in the Punjabi way now, for example, including in the distant South. This makes it bitter-sweet for me. On the other hand, I feel happy that many of our traditions have become mainstream. And it gives me great pride to see that Sikhs still garner respect, especially amongst those who know what they have contributed to the emergence of this nation as a modern land.
12: Kuldeep (Australia), August 02, 2007, 1:06 AM.
My concern is that such convoluted analyses will in turn create further division in the community.
13: Brijinder Kaur Khurana (New Delhi, India), August 02, 2007, 1:17 AM.
Actually, the writer is correct in that Sikhism's greatest threat today is from within. Hence it is the moral duty of all those who are blessed with the necessary skills and experience, to spread the right message of Sikhi and peace in the community, so that the structure of Sikhism is strengthened.
14: Inder (U.S.A.), August 02, 2007, 2:06 AM.
Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it. The very real economic and social consequences of the Partition cannot be understated; it caused a traumatic upheaval that continues to this day, two generations down the line. I have personally felt them through the pain of my parents, grandparents, and relatives. While the general attitude of Sikhs may be optimistic and in the spirit of "Chardi-kalaa", the author of the op-ed is mistaken if he believes the momentum has completely shifted. The simple fact is that Sikhs cannot freely experience worship in the land of their Founder and forefathers, unlike Muslims and Hindus. It is no coincidence that since Partition, Sikhs have more or less been struggling to reaffirm their identity and spirit, given the pressures from within and without. 1984 and other recent incidents are simply litmus tests which illustrate that the struggle continues to this day.
15: Satnam Singh (Batala, Punjab, India), August 02, 2007, 2:53 AM.
Sava lakh se ek laraoon, Tabbe Gobind Singh naam kahaoon!
16: Rajdeep Singh (Chandigarh, Punjab, India), August 02, 2007, 6:23 AM.
The crooked babas are successful today because we're too busy tied up in differentiating between jutt and khatri, etc ... the dera people have merely taken advantage of our weaknesses. These fellows exist only because of our divisions and because they provide vote-banks to equally crooked politicians. The cancer of brahminism has crept into our midst. If we don't get chemotherapy immediately and stop turning to babas, astrologers, devis and devatas, and the like ... there'll be more of this mess.
17: Sanjit Singh (Malaysia), August 02, 2007, 7:15 AM.
This is an article that lulls us back into deep slumber. All this while, while we are being torn apart by politics and brahminism, we the Sikhs have indeed been in deep slumber. Now, I am happy to note that finally we have opened an eye (though the other is still shut). I disagree with the author ... we need to take this threat seriously and address the situation carefully, calmly, maturely, efficiently.
18: Jagar Singh (India), August 02, 2007, 8:31 AM.
If we do not correct our weaknesses, we have no right to blame others for making inroads into Sikhism. No doubt, this baba tried to make a parody of the entire amrit rite to show that he is as big a guru. You'd have to be quite foolish to follow this rapist and murderer and consider him as pious. Living as a minority in a predominantly Hindu India, we'll have to be ever-vigilant in not letting all the progress made by Sikhi in five centuries slide back into the brahminical morass.
19: Harinder (Pune, India), August 02, 2007, 9:30 AM.
In 1947, we lost West Punjab. Now, we are gradually losing East Punjab ... or whatever is left of it. So, no Nankana Sahib, no Punja Sahib. What does the future hold for the Durbar Sahib? We should be studying the following events carefully: the fate of the Bamiyan Buddhas under Taleban rule. THe fate of the Babri Masjid in Hindu India. The fate of the Durbar Sahib in 1984 ... etc, etc. We need to have a long term strategy in place to reclaim our lost lands and shrines. We'll need to be ingenious. We must not use this peace time to make only celebrations. Instead, we need to move in a deliberate manner to regain our lost legacy under the laws and legal tools available to us. It can be done ... after all, the Jews did it! There's no sleep till then.
20: Parminder (Edmonton, Canada), August 02, 2007, 11:17 AM.
Born in Africa. Studied in Canada. Go to India ocassionally. Kids born in Canada. Do you think it matters to the younger generation as to which trade-caste they descend from? All my kids and I want to know and proclaim is that we are Sikhs and that everybody is equal. Basically, we are taught to reject the complete package of caste practices and embrace equality without any reservations. Time to take the blinders off and grow up.
21: Bikram (India), August 02, 2007, 1:45 PM.
As if the destiny of humans or a particular race/religion/nation, etc. whatever, is in the hands of humans ... the world will play to the strings the way the Creator pulls them. I believe that all this analysis is futile. A Sikh is a Sikh as long as he prays and stays in remembrance of God, lives by the Guru's teachings, and sees all creation as God's manifestation ... rest, whatever happens to the world (or its people/religions) is God's business ... it's His world. He decides when and what to fix or unfix. P.S. But yes, some comments here regarding the spread of the disease of casteism and the misuse of political influence are correct. It'll be interesting to see which way the wheel turns!
22: Kirthy (Edinburgh, U.K.), August 02, 2007, 2:40 PM.
I love Parminder's comment. Being British born, of African Sardar parents and having grown up in Australia, I think that most people in this day and age do not care about caste distinctions. One of the reasons Sikhism was formed was to fight these goofy practices: hearing that there some people amongst us who think they are pumping up their self esteem by adding the names of their ancestral trade-castes is really rather sad. My parents and grandparents studied and practiced their faith (which, if you really look at it, is extraordinarily modern) and have passed it on to me. My mum thinks its very anti-Sikh for people to even mention caste and I think she is absolutely correct. Therefore, I have decided to have nothing to do with "friends" who look down on others because of some perceived caste designations. I simply don't want to be friends with people who are that ignorant ... thankfully, the bulk of people are not. To make things even broader, aren't we all part of a global family, really?
23: Parampreet Singh (Alameda, California, U.S.A.), August 02, 2007, 4:57 PM.
I verified the facts. This baba assembled his followers, baptized them with his "jaam-e-roohani" and told them to use the name "Insaan". Mr Gupta, who does this description remind you of? I hate to be told what to think, so I will not tell you, who. I find your descriptions of juttness, such as "insulted their juttness" quite casteist. My generation of Sikhs does not care for castes. My grandparents cared, my parents less so, and I less still. Sikhism's greatest threat comes from assimilation into India's Hindu culture. That is, the fate already suffered by the Buddhists and the Jains of India ... and Lord knows how many other movements to date.
24: Sheetal Shah (Ahmedabad, Iindia), August 03, 2007, 1:21 AM.
The Sikh is the power of India, the sun of India, the light of India ...
25: Jas Sandhu (U.K.), August 03, 2007, 8:15 AM.
Typical piece from India: an article written by one who cannot possibly understand what it means to be a Sikh. The fact is that no one can ultimately refuse any people the right to self-determination - all that short-sighted regimes can do is delay it. See the 1989 elections, when the vast majority expressed a desire for independence?
26: Pal Singh (Canada), August 03, 2007, 10:18 PM.
The greatest danger is not from anywhere else but within us. If we can stick to our principles, we will prevail.
27: Darshan (Malaysia), August 06, 2007, 7:34 AM.
There is never any cause for our community to feel insecure. Sikhs have faith in, and serve God, the Lord of all creation. Why should we feel insecure? Just because we are challenged, from time to time? The dera incident is a reminder for us to come together and be united, and to tackle the issues headlong. We shall overcome ...
28: Amandeep singh (Australia), August 06, 2007, 11:21 PM.
They need to remember that Sikhs are created to be saint-soldiers.
29: Vinay (Mumbai, India), August 07, 2007, 4:52 PM.
Sat Sri Akaal, everyone: It really hurts to see some of the comments above that attack Hindu practices to express the diffrentiation of Sikhi from it. Besides, what is brahmanism, anyway? Casteism is no doubt an evil in our society, and true that Sikhs have been more successful in tackling it, and abolishing it. But, there is a whole world out there of Hindus, including brahmins like myself, who were always raised with the values that all humans around you are equal. Personally, I hardly know any Hindus here in suburban Mumbai who do not have respect for the Sikh religion, and I'm talking not just about Punjabi Hindus. I come from a miniscule minority, the Saraswat brahmin community. Most of us have deep respect and a special place for the Sikh religion. A visit to the Golden Temple of Amritsar is a must-do for us when in Punjab, just like it is for you. Hating Sikhs for us would be like hating blood brothers; let us not forget the roti-beti rishtaa that Hindus and Sikhs share; and our joint values, spiritual doctrines, and thousands of years of mutual culture that we share.
30: Suraj Singh Khalsa (Mumbai, India), August 12, 2007, 6:14 AM.
Gur Fateh.