A Critical Review of Sachi Sakhi and Parasaraprasna
by Baldev Singh
Sometime back a fellow stung by the venom of “caste pride” insisted that Waras Shah complimented the fiercely independent nature of Jats by saying:
Waras, the Jats have become masters of the country and there is a government in every home.[1]
“Dear brother,” I replied, “Contrary to what you are saying, Waras Shah’s observation is about the quarrelsome and self-destructive nature of Jats (a predominant farming community of Punjab). His comments are about the Sikh movement dominated by Jats, which had split into several groups due to internal fighting. These groups were out to destroy each other forsaking Sikh ethos and forgetting their commitment to Guru Granth and Guru Panth.”
Besides, Waras Shah has also remarked that no one can distort things the way a Jat does.
Jats can distort the meaning of a hill-stream into a mouse, which makes it impossible for the authorities (to get the truth out of Jats).[2]
However, Gurtej Singh’s tribute to Sirdar Kapur Singh in the Sikh Virsa of March 2003 is clearly an example of exaggeration[3]. Gurtej called Kapur Singh a great thinker (philosopher) of the twentieth century - an eminent scholar - and Bhai Gurdas of our times. There is no doubt that Kapur Singh was an intelligent man. He had the credentials to show it. He was an ICS officer with M. A. in philosophy from Cambridge, and he was well-read man with knowledge of several languages. However, his works, Sachi Sakhi[ 4] and Parasaraprasna[5] don’t reflect either deep understanding of Sikhism or logical thinking. To my knowledge these books have not been analyzed on the touchstone of evidence, logic, and Aad Guru Granth Sahib (AGGS). This article attempts to examine them in light of these criteria.
Sachi Sakhi (True Story)
Kapur Singh published the first edition, but I don’t have information about the second edition. However, Shromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee(S.G.P.C) published the third edition in 1993 when the book was not available in the market and the Dharam Parchar Committee distributes it.
Through his books Sirdar Kapur Singh, National Professor of Sikhism, has misled Sikhs. It is unfortunate when intelligent people, who haven’t even seen this book, quote it forcefully. The book is mostly about Sikh politics, Kapur Singh’s unlawful dismissal as an ICS officer, and the unjust treatment meted out to him by the Indian judicial system, which is supposed to protect the rights of all citizens. However, it also contains innuendoes, allegations, questionable statements, unsubstantiated claims, and misinterpretations of various events. Analysis of all the items is beyond the scope of this article. Some of the items, which have become common topics of debate or conversation within the Sikh community are scrutinised hereunder.
Myth no. 1
On pages 101-13: Kapur Singh claims that the British offered Sikhs their own “Sikh State” and Mohammad Ali Jinnah offered them “an autonomous Sikh State within Pakistan”. However, the ignorant, naïve, and inept Sikh leaders like Master Tara Singh, Giani Kartar Singh, Baldev Singh and Maharaja Yadvinder Singh did not respond positively to explore these offers. Thus, they are responsible for rendering future generations of Sikhs subservient to Hindus. His claim is based on the information he got from newspapers, press releases, and his own conversations with Jinnah, Maharaja Bhupinder Singh of Patiala, Sir Jogindera Singh, Sardar Shivdev Singh Oberai and others. At no time he was personally involved in the negotiations between the Akalis and Jinnah or the British.
It is difficult to imagine that the British or Jinnah’s offer to Sikhs was simply altruistic. Furthermore, it is difficult to imagine that few Sikhs like Master Tara Singh, Giani Kartar Singh, Baldev Singh and Maharaja Yadvinder Singh could have prevented Jinnah or the British from pursuing their objectives. They could have talked to other Sikh leaders or taken their offers directly to the Sikh masses to accomplish their goals. However, there is no evidence that they talked to any other Sikh leader about their offer. Most documents relating to the partition of India have been released and published, and there is no evidence, that either the British or Jinnah offered the Sikhs “a Sikh State,” or “an autonomous Sikhs State within Pakistan”, respectively. It turns out that the British as well as Jinah were trying to persuade the Sikhs to join Pakistan in order to avoid the division of the Sikh community into two halves, one in Pakistan and the other in India.
The Sikh leadership declined this suggestion wisely because Sikhs remember very vividly the atrocities of the Mughal rule against the community. Instead, they threw their lot with the Hindus, as they had no prior experience living under Hindu rule. Had they accepted the offer of Jinnah the situation of the Sikhs in Pakistan would have been far worse than that of the Ahmadiyya Muslims. Dr. Abdus Salam, an eminent scientist of the twentieth century and a Nobel Laureate in physics, was stripped of his Pakistani citizenship.
Many Sikhs fault the Sikh leadership for their naivete for relying on public statements made by Gandhi and Nehru that Sikhs would enjoy autonomy in an independent India. They argue that the Sikh leadership should have obtained written guaranty signed by the Hindu leadership. But would the Hindus have honored that guaranty after becoming “Masters” of India!
India agreed to a UN supervised plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir to solve the Kashmir problem. Even the United Nations and the world opinion has not been able to force India to fulfil its agreement for more than fifty years. The same thing would have happened to any written guaranty given to the Sikhs by the Hindu leadership. There is no doubt that Sikh leadership was taken in by the liberal and secular façade put up by Gandhi and Nehru, who were diehard believers of the Hindu caste system and the perverse morality preached by Lord Krishna in the Mahabharta which simply put states: victory is every thing; cheating, lying, and manipulation is the essence of Dharma. But we can remind the ungrateful Hindu community and inform the world that had Sikhs accepted the offer of Jinnah, Pakistan’s border would have been close to Dehli and Jammu and Kashmir would also have gone to Pakistan?
When the partition of India seemed inevitable, it was the Akali leadership who insisted that if the country was going to be divided on communal lines then why should East Punjab and West Bengal, where Muslims were in minority, be given to Pakistan. This idea was put forward by the Akalis, whom Kapur Singh calls stupid. The Congress leadership did not care if all of Punjab were to be included in Pakistan. They were eager to get rid off most of the Muslims so that they could establish their own Ram Raj (rule of Hindu god Rama).
It is true that Giani Kartar Singh and Master Tara Singh did not match the education of Gandhi, Nehru and Jinnah, who were lawyers, educated in top British universities. However, both kartar Singh and Tara Singh were honest and self-sacrificing leaders, who worked very hard to safeguard Sikh interest and saved the community from annihilation. The Akali leaders also put forth the idea of total transfer of Muslim and Hindu-Sikh populations in Punjab. In pre-partition Punjab, the Sikhs constituted 13% of the population and were scattered all over Punjab with heavy concentration in central districts, with a slight majority only in one Tehsil, Taran Taran. After partition, the Sikhs were in majority in the Punjabi-speaking region of the Indian Punjab, which later on became Punjabi Suba (state).
On page 115, Kapur Singh writes, “After an inquiry it was found that the British wanted to propose to the Sikhs that if they can’t come to any reasonable agreement with Muslims, then the Sikhs should accept ‘a Sikh State’ covering an area from Panipat to Nankana Sahib. This state could have an access to the ocean. This state could enter into a defense pact with England according to which 25,000 British armed forces would be stationed in the Sikh State for ten years. Seasoned British army officers would train the Sikh army. The Sikhs would buy military equipment from the British on the condition that 50,000 Sikhs would be employed in the British army for ten years. The treaty between the British and the Sikhs could be reviewed after ten years.” However, Kapur Singh does not mention the composition of the population of the proposed “Sikh State”.
In 1947 there was no district in Punjab with Sikh majority whereas the partition of the country was based on the “population majority concept”. For example, the seven districts – Hoshiarpur, Jullandur, Ludhiana, Ferozepur, Lahore, Amritsar and Gurdaspur, according to 1941 census, had 28 % Sikhs, 46 % Muslims and 26 % Hindus and others[6]. According to the 1931 census, the population of the area from Panipat to Nanakana Sahib was 42% Muslim[7]. If these were any guide, the Muslim population would have gained further in percentage by 1947. The 58% non-Muslim population was divided between Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, and others. The Sikh population of this area was not more than 25%. Would Muslims and Hindus of this proposed “Sikh State” or Pakistan and India have allowed this state to become a Sikh state? Israel is a Jewish State because its population is more than 80% Jewish; Pakistan is an Islamic State because its population is more than 95% Muslim and India is a Hindu State because its population is about 80% Hindu. It is no wonder that there is no evidence that the British or Jinnah offered the Sikhs a Sikh State or an autonomous Sikh State within Pakistan, respectively.
Myth no. 2
On page 72-76, Kapur Singh mentions, “The Akalis prevented Dr. Ambedkar from converting to Sikhism. Had Ambedkar converted, 60 million Untouchables (Dalits) would have followed him and become Sikhs. Bhupinder Singh, Maharaja of Patiala, had agreed to marry his sister to Ambedkar if he converted to Sikhism.”
These assertions are incorrect. First, Gurtej Singh, a protégé of Kapur Singh, has himself refuted the assertion that the Akalis prevented Dr. Ambedkar from converting to Sikhism[8]. Besides, contrary to Kapur Singh’s claim, Ambedkar took advantage of the naivete and generosity of the Akalis who went out of their way to accommodate his wishes. They set up a press for his paper Janta and built a Khalsa College in Bombay for higher education of Dalits at a time when there were only few Sikh colleges in Punjab where the vast majority of the Sikhs lived[9]. How many Dalit students of this college became Sikhs?
Ambedkar’s change of mind not to covert to Sikhism was a political decision of a politician. According to his calculation his conversion to Sikhism would not have advanced his political career. Had he really wanted to convert, who could have prevented him? Did anybody prevent Giani Dit Singh or Professor Gurmukh Singh from converting? Second, how did Kapur Singh predict that 60 million Dalits would have followed Ambedkar and become Sikhs? How many of them became Buddhists when he converted Buddhism? Human behavior is very difficult to predict, especially of those who have been subjugated and dehumanized for thousands of years, like the untouchables of India.
For instance, if all the Dalits did not convert to Islam or Christianity during a millenium of Muslim and Christian rule when there were clear advantages and incentives for them to do so then how could Ambedkar’s conversion to Sikhism have persuaded them to convert to Sikhism? Even in Punjab most of the Dalits did not become Sikh over a period of 500 hundred years in spite of the fact that 95% of the Sikhs came out of sudras and untouchables.
Most Sikh leaders after Guru Gobind Singh came out of Jats, Kalals, Tarkhans, Mazhbis, Labanas and Sansis, all of whom are lower castes in the Hindu caste system. In recent times Sikhs with Mazhbi and Tarkhan background have been appointed as Jathedar of Akal Takhat, the seat of highest religious authority. If these examples did not inspire Punjabi untouchables to become Sikhs then how could Dr. Ambedkar’s conversion to Sikhism have automatically converted 60 million untouchables, spread throughout India, to Sikhism. It is noteworthy that most Dalits entered the Sikh-fold in the early part of the 20th century during the Singh Sabha Movement and they constitute 8-10% of the Sikh population.
Third, the statement that the Maharaja of Patiala, Bhupinder Singh had agreed to marry his sister to Dr. Ambedkar if he converted to Sikhism also appears incorrect. Why would the Maharaja, who was persecuting his Sikh-subjects, would marry his sister to a Dalit converted to Sikhism? Would it not be akin to bribing someone to convert to Sikhism? On the Vaisakhi day of 1699 Guru Gobind Singh declared with a drawn sword in hand, “If any one wants to be my Sikh, come prepared to offer your head.” Guru Nanak said exactly the same in his liberating message to the people. People ho embraced Sikhism did it voluntarily.
If you want to play the game of love (righteous path) then follow my path and come prepared to sacrifice your life. Once you step on this path, don’t be hesitant to offer your head.
(AGGS, M 1, p 1412)
It is surprising that Kapur Singh totally ignored the fact that it was Ambedkar, considered the brain behind the drafting of the Indian Constitution, who on his own or under pressure, clubbed Sikhs with Buddhists and Jains and made them Hindu under clause 25 of the Indian Constitution. What he did to the Sikhs with the stroke of a pen is similar to what Adi Shankaracharya and Hindu rulers did to Buddhists through violent means!
Kapur Singh also ignored the fact that in November 1948, a ten-member sub-committee of the Constituent Assembly recommended reservation of seats for religious minorities in East Punjab, with weightage for Sikhs. But the minority committee of the Constituent Assembly, which included Ambedkar, Nehru, Patel and Rajendraparsad, turned down this proposal[10].
Myth no. 3
This incidence (p. 103) happened in March 1947 when Giani Kartar Singh was the president of Shromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) and Dr. Gopal Singh Ph.D. was his very close protégé. At that time there was great tension between Hindus and Muslims in Bengal. One day a delegation of Begalis led by an aristocrat from East Bengal came to Amritsar to meet Giani Kartar Singh. They requested and urged him to send some learned Sikhs immediately to Bengal in order to baptize about 500,000 Hindu Bengali youth to form a Khalsa brigade. They proposed to baptize 3 to 4 million Bengalis all over Bengal with particular focus on East Bengal in order to check the onslaught of pro Pakistani forces.
However, Giani Ji cleverly evaded them by saying that he would take care of it immediately, but did nothing. When Dr. Gopal Singh asked him the reason for his inaction, Giani Ji told him the secret, “You don’t understand politics. Even if 10 million Bengalis were to become Sikhs, still there will be only one Sikh minister in the central government, and Sardar Baldev Singh is already there for that position.”
How could anyone believe this story? If Kapur Singh thought that in 1947 the conversion of millions of Bengalis to Sikhism was so easy, then how come hundreds of learned Sikhs like him and aristocrats were not able to convert even five thousand untouchables (Dalits) let alone high caste Hindus of Punjab?
Myth no. 4
On pages 4-5, Kapur Singh claims, “In October 1947, Shri Chandu Lal Trivedi, Governor of Punjab, issued a circular to Punjab deputy commissioners to treat all Sikh as criminals. At that time Swaran Singh was the “home minister” of Punjab and there were only two Sikh Deputy Commissioners in Punjab. Kapur Singh was posted in Kangra and the other one was in Gurgaon. However, he did not divulge his name. Moreover, he claims that in 1954, a similar order was issued to senior army officers to treat Sikhs in the armed forces in a manner so as to demoralize them.”
It is unfortunate that Kapur Singh didn’t keep a copy of the circular for the sake of history. It is also unfortunate that he didn’t publish that circular verbatim in Sachi Sakhi for the benefit of the readers. Besides, neither Swaran Singh, nor the other Deputy Commissioner, nor anyone among the numerous high-ranking Sikh police officials has made any mention of this circular. Similarly, at that time there were numerous Sikhs in very high positions in the armed forces and none of them has said any thing about the 1954 order issued to the armed forces.
Some people argue how any responsible government official, let alone the Governor of Punjab, would label the entire Sikh community as criminals? Even if any bigoted Hindu official had that much hatred towards the Sikhs would he have put it in writing! But why would Kapur Singh make up this story? What was he to gain except the wrath of the Governor? There are compelling reason to believe that the Governor of Punjab did issue an order regarding the law and order situation in Punjab at that time for the following reasons.
First, the partition of Punjab is one of the major upheavals of the twentieth century. In Punjab almost all Hindu and Sikh population of about five million was forced to leave homes and properties in Pakistan. Similarly, about five and half million Muslims were forced to vacate their home and properties in India. In the ensuing communal frenzy and carnage, as many as one million people are believed to have perished and thousands of women were kidnapped and raped. Almost one third of the population of Punjab was engulfed in the inferno created by the independence of India. Of the total population of about five and half million Sikhs, about 40% were rendered homeless due to it. (Yet the Hindu and Western mythmakers keep telling us that Mahatma Gandhi won independence for India without shedding a drop of blood!).
Second, when peace is disturbed, criminal elements come out to take advantage of the situation. Third, one can’t imagine the anger and pain of Hindus and Sikhs refugees, some of whom might have resorted to lawlessness out of shear desperation. Fourth, farmers, mostly Sikhs, constituted a high percentage of the refugee population. Peasants throughout the world irrespective of their religion or ethnicity are more assertive and aggressive and are more likely to take law into their hands than any other group of people. In light of this situation, the Governor may have asked the deputy commissioners to keep this section of refugees under strict watch. And this might have led Kapur Singh to conclude that the circular was intended against the entire Sikh community.
It is ironic that Kapur Singh’s own feeling about the aggressive and criminal nature of some elements in the farming community is not very different from what Chandu Lal Trivedi might have said about them in the circular. For example on page 73 he says,
“After the Gurdwara act of 1925, the Akali Party was split into two groups, one headed by Sardar Bahadur Mehtab Singh and the other by Master Tara Singh. At that time it had become quite clear to Akali leaders like Giani Kartar Singh, Master Tata Singh, Ishar Singh Majhail and others that educated Sikhs, who are the product of British education system, believe in gentlemanly conduct. They do not believe in the use of abusive language, scuffles, fistfights and knocking off each other’s turbans. They are very much afraid of such tactics. The easy way to drive them away from party meetings, or Sikh organizations is to treat them with - the Singh mode of conducting business - abusing their mothers and sisters, scuffles and fist-fights. After such treatment, these cowards (educated Sikhs) would loose interest in the affairs of Sikh community forever and accept the hegemony of their group in the political sphere.”
The following two anecdotes were described by Harpal Singh Banga[11]. One day Jathedar (leader) Jiwan Singh Umranangal complained to Kapur Singh, “I have spent many years in jail for the sake of the Panth (Sikh community), however, the Akali high command does not value my sacrifice, and it seems that no body gives a damn.” “Jathedara, you would have been behind bars any way, you should be glad that you went to jail for the sake of the Panth. If you were not a member of the Akali party, you would have gone to jail for stealing somebody’s buffalo. When I was deputy commissioner, I used to tour my district and instruct police inspectors to bring in the people, whose name were on the category B-list - bad characters, law breakers and people who are naturally disposed to commit crimes. The inspector used to beat their behinds with a shoe before releasing them. Jiwan Singh, isn’t it fortunate that your name is not on that list? Instead, you are a member of the Akali party. Go on, enjoy yourself,” replied Kapur Singh.
At another time, Banga asked Kapur Singh, “What was the main objective of your life.” “My main objective was to thrash my uncle after becoming a Deputy Commissioner (D. C.) because he used to harass my father without any rhyme or reason. It was very important that he should be taught a lesson. And you can teach somebody that kind of lesson only after becoming a D. C. Isn’t that so?” answered Kapur Singh.
On Seikh Ahmad Sirhindi and Guru Arjan’s martyrdom (page 1-2, preface) Kapur Singh claims that it was Seikh Ahmad Sirhindi, who exerted influence on Emperor Jehangir to kill Guru Arjan Dev. However, his analysis that Jahangir acted only under the influence Seikh Ahmad Sirhindi is flawed. On page 34, Kapur Singh himself has mentioned that at one time Jehangir imprisoned Seikh Ahmad Sirhindi in the fort of Gwalior, as the he was afraid of the latter’s growing influence in the armed forces. Moreover, quoting from Jehangir’s diary (Touzk-e-Jehangiri, 1864 ed., p 72-73), Ajit Singh tells a different story about the relationship between Jehangir and Seikh Ahmad Sirhindi[12].
“During these days, it was reported to me that a shayyad (a loud talker, a cheat) of the name of Sheikh Ahmad had spread the net of hypocrisy and deceit in Sirhind, and caught in it many of the apparent worshippers without spirituality. He had sent into every city of the country one of his disciple, whom he called his deputy (khalifa) and whom he considered more skilled than others in the adoring of shops (of deceit) and selling of religious knowledge, and deceiving men. He had also written a number of idle tales to his disciples and believers and had made them into a book he called Mukktubat (letters).
“So I ordered that he should be produced in my court. He obeyed the orders. He couldn’t give proper replies to my questions. I found him without wisdom and sagacity and extremely arrogant (bighayat, magrur was khudapasand). I thought it was necessary to confine him for a few days in a disciplinary jail (Zindan-e-adab) so that his brain and temper may be somewhat rectified and people’s commotion may subside. I therefore, entrusted him to the stone-hearted (sangdilan) Bani Rae to keep him in the fort of Gwalior.”
However, Professor H. R. Gupta has misquoted this information in the History of the Sikhs as Jehangir’s views about Guru Hargobind and his imprisonment in the fort of Gwalior. So it is clear from Jehangir’s own diary that Seikh Ahmad Sirhindi’s influence on Jehangir was not as strong, as Kapur Singh infers. Moreover, recently, Professor Harinder Singh Mehboob has claimed in Sehje Racio Khalsa that there are different versions of Touzk-e-Jehangiri, which raises questions about its authorship. And in some versions there is no mention of the death of Guru
Arjan[13]. Additionally, he also claims that Seikh Ahmad Sirhindi came into contact with Jehangir after the execution of Guru Arjan[14]. Therefore, there were other people who poisoned Jehangir’s mind against Guru Arjan. For example, Khatris / Brahmins of Goindwal who had complained to Emperor Akbar against Guru Amardas.
Jehangir was an easygoing person and more interested in sensual pleasures than in mundane government affairs according to historians. Why Jehangir, whose father, Emperor Akbar had so much respect for the Gurus, developed so much hatred for Guru Arjan? What did Guru Arjan do to Jahngir to earn his wrath? May be it was the influence of bigoted religious Muslim leaders like Shaikh Ahmad Sirhindi, but it is not unreasonable to think that there were others, who made their input. For example, Jehangir’s mother (a Rajput princess), his uncle (mama), Raja Man Singh and other Hindu officials like Birbal, Todar Mal and Chandu, who were against Guru Arjan, because the Gurus had rejected the essentials of Hinduism and the moral authority of Hindu scriptures[15].
The proponents of caste system regarded the Sikh movement as challenge to their way of life. The Rajput chiefs of Shivalik hills declared war on Guru Gobind Singh when he initiated the Khalsa order by administering them Khande Di Pahul from a common steel bowl. They took it as a direct threat to their Dharma, the caste system.
On Guru Harkrishan’s death Kapur Singh claims (p. 35), “Aurangzeb wanted to eliminate Guru Harkrishan, therefore, he asked Raja Jai Singh to bring the Guru to Delhi. The all-knowing Guru knew what Aurangzeb had in mind, so he refused to see him. He infected himself with smallpox through Yogic miracle ( yogsidhi) to avoid physical contact with Aurangzeb and died willingly.”
Smallpox is a viral disease; it can’t be created through yogic techniques. Here Kapur Singh has repudiated both science and Nanakian philosophy (Gurmat). Hukam (Devine Law) controls birth and death. Guru Nanak denounced the yogis and their fake exploits to impress the ignorant and the gullible. According to Gurmat there is no such thing as a supernatural phenomenon because whatever happens in the world is subject to Hukam and nothing is beyond it. Ignorant, gullible, superstitious and week minds believe in yogic miracles. It is unthinkable and unbelievable that a National Professor of Sikhism would suggest that a Sikh Guru indulged in yogic practices and believed in yogic miracles. Moreover, what is the implication of Kapur Singh’s statement? Did Guru Harkrishan commit suicide to avoid a meeting with Aurangzeb?
Composing Kachi Bani (apocryphal composition): I have heard and read that he used make his own verses or distort Gurbani verses in his discussions. While arguing with Professor Kirpal Singh about the offer of a Sikh State by the British, Kapur Singh changed the verse “logan siau mera thathabaga” to “sikhan siau mera thathabaga.” When Kirpal Singh reminded him that Guru Har Rai disowned his son Ram Rai for the distortion of Gurbani, Kapur Singh got furious and called his remark foul[16].
Hindu race, Appendix, E (pages 239-248): In his speech in the Indian Parliament on the reorganization of the erstwhile Punjab State into Hindi and Punjabi regions Kapur Singh asserted, “Sikhs are staunch guardians of the basic insights into the reality of ancient Hindu race.”
He has used the term “Hindu race” frequently in his writings. It is strange that Kapur Singh who claimed to have deep knowledge of ancient Hindu scriptures did not know that the word Hindu is not found in those scriptures. The name Hindu was given to the people of the Indian subcontinent by people who lived on the western side of the Hindu Kush mountains and it means - black, thief, robber, dacoit and waylayer[17]. Besides, there is no such thing as a Hindu race. I will leave it to anthropologist to determine the racial identity of the Indian people. However, most Sikhs are of Punjabi origin and are descendents of people, who have evolved over several thousand years through the process of miscegenation between native people (aboriginal tribes) and the Caucasian tribes who conquered the Indian subcontinent.
Defaming others, page 90: Kapur Singh was no different than modern Sikh politicians, who indulge in character assassination of each other. He has maligned both Mater Tara Singh and Giani Kartar Singh throughout the book. He minced no words while degrading Giani Kartar Singh and called him a queer by quoting a couplet by a poet by the name Gang.
A queer never fights a battle, nor he beats a battle drum.
Gang bids farewell after greeting all.
Finally, Kapur Singh was a typical Jat. He drank regularly[18] and used abusive language in daily conversations[11]. According to Harpal Singh Banga, one day Kapur Singh, as usual, was calling all sorts of names to Akalis, when Dr. Bhagat Singh interrupted and said, “ Sir, not all Akalis are bad, I am also an Akali, I have always listened to you and I am not dishonest.” Hearing this Kapur Singh got agitated and started abusing his mother and sister. Bhagat Singh kept listening calmly. After finishing his tea, Kapur Singh said, “I have called too many nasty names, and you kept quite. I hope you did not mind.” “No sir, I don’t mind your abuses, as I am a physician. Sometimes when an insane patient slaps me, I don’t get angry with him, as it is my duty to find a cure for his ailment. I could cure you Sir, but I have not diagnosed your malady as yet,” replied Bhagat Singh.
II
Parasaraprasana (The questions of Parasara) was edited and published by Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) in 1989.
Parasaraprasana is altogether different from Sachi Sakhi. It is about the establishment of the Khalsa order by Guru Gobind Singh, the meaning of five Ks and the Sikh tenets. I have yet to meet a Sikh who wasn’t confused after reading this book. Readers ask, “What is Kapur Singh trying to say? Is he trying to project the uniqueness of Sikh philosophy or trying to submerge it in ancient scriptures? Is he expounding the philosophy of Aad Guru Garnth Sahib (AGGS) or the Sikhism of Bipran literature like Dasam Granth?”[19] The answers to such questions can be found in the foreword by G. S. Randhawa, Vice-Cancellor of GNDU:
“The book is an outcome of long discourses that went on for over a year between Sirdar Kapur Singh and a friend of his, Sri Sardari Lal Parasara.”
In his zeal to remove the ignorance, doubts and misunderstanding of his friend about Sikhism, Kapur Singh dumped all his knowledge of religions, languages, philosophy, history, political science, psychoanalysis and other fields in the pages of this book. That is why this book is so confusing. Generally, it is true that new ideas or philosophies do not grow in vacuum, rather, they are built on existing ones. But it does not mean that one has to distort a new idea or philosophy to relate it to ancient thoughts or scriptures. This is what Kapur Singh has done in his book. He has gone out of his way to find the meaning of Five Ks and roots of Nanakian philosophy (Gurmat) in ancient Hindu and other religious scriptures. Quite often, his explanations and conclusions are inappropriate and controversial. It is beyond the scope of this article to include discuss all these issues, only some of the statements which contradict fundamental Sikh principles are adequately discussed.
Writers like Kapur Singh and Paiara Singh Padam have misled Sikhs in believing that Guru Gobind Singh is the author of Dasam Granth. Such writers promote Bipran literature[19] instead of the true message of Aad Guru Granth Sahib (AGGS). They pick few lines from here and there from the Dasam Granth and other Bipran literature, which suits their objective without paying any attention to the contents which contradict the core of Sikh philosophy. Their writings are generally based on Bipran literature instead of AGGS, which is the only authentic source of Sikh teachings. Moreover, it is ironic that such writers interpret the teachings of AGGS on the basis Bipran literature.
In Parasaraprasna, Kapur Singh has relied heavily on Dasam Granth and other Bipran literature. He has quoted from an obscure copy of the Dasam Granth in the possession of a Sodhi family of Anadpur (I think Kapur Singh was married in that family). It seems he really believed that Guru Gobind Singh is the author of Dasam Granth. For example, Kapur Singh did not participate in the two seminars, which were held to determine the validity of the contents of Dasam Granth ascribed to Guru Gibind Singh[20]. Hereunder, are some statements from Parasaraprasna that contradict or misinterpret or distort basic principles of Nanakian philosophy (Gurmat)?
It is well known that Kapur Singh has been warning Sikhs that Hinduism is out to devour Sikhism. To bring this message home to the Sikhs, he has quoted an excerpt in Sachi Sakhi from a British intelligence report of 1911[21]:
“Hinduism has always been hostile to Sikhism whose Gurus powerfully and successfully attacked the principle of caste which is the foundation on which the whole fabric of Brahmanism has been reared. The activities of Hindus have, therefore, been constantly directed to the undermining of Sikhism both by preventing the children of Sikh fathers from taking Pahul and by reducing professed Sikhs from their allegiance to their faith. Hinduism has strangled Buddhism, once a formidable rival to it and it has already made serious inroads into the domain of Sikhism.”
It is for this reason why, in Sachi Sakhi, he curses Akalis for not accepting the offer of a Sikh state from the British or in post-independence period he persistently urged the Akalis to campainn for a Punjabi-speaking state, and later on he was the architect and the prime force behind the Anandpur Resolution. However, in Parasaraprasna he has been trying to find the roots of Sikhism not only in Hinduism but also in other religions. For instance, on page 10 he wrote,
“Sikhism accepts all the four concepts of Hinduism, (a) the doctrine of Karma, (b) the doctrine of Transmigration or Metempsychosis, (c) the doctrine of Dharma, and (d) the doctrine of Maya. Though, these concepts are in some fundamental respects interpreted differently and evaluated otherwise than in various sects and schools of Hinduism. Viewed thus, Sikhism might appear as essentially and basically a Hindu religion.”
Further, on page 12 he claims, “Sikhism is grounded in the post-Vedic Upanishadic tradition and in ways of thought in so far as this aspect of Hinduism is concerned.”
Even an avowed foe of Sikhim would have not been able to destroy the the uniqueness of Sikhism, the way our National Professor of Sikhism has done. It is strange that he was warning the Sikhs all the time that Hindus have designs to destroy Sikhism whereas in his writings he was pushing Sikhism in the fold of Hinduism as he has done in Parasaraprasna. There is absolutely and categorically no support for his views in AGGS because Sikh Gurus rejected all essentials of Hinduism and the moral authority of Hindu scriptures[15, 22, 23].
Further down on page 12 he claims, “The ceremony of what is called Akhandpath (uninterrupted reading of AGGS) practiced amongst the Sikhs and claiming the approval and authority of Guru Gobind Singh himself, is apparently a Vedic ceremony of yajna based upon the doctrine of mantra.”
Fortunately, the editors (Piar Singh and Madanjit Kaur) have rightly pointed out in the footnote that the Sikh annals have nothing to substantiate this view. Besides, on the same page in the top paragraph he himself has very clearly stated that Guru Gobind Singh repudiated the notion of spiritual benefit by mere chanting or recitation of any scripture (Akalustat, Dasam Granth, p 19).
Moreover, AGGS rejects mere chanting or reciting of scriptures as a vehicle for spiritual development, and it lays the utmost emphasis on the comprehension of the scripture (Word) through discussion and deliberation.
Countless people have come and gone who have attempted to describe the greatness of God. Vedas also describe God but without finding the limit of Its greatness. Mere reading of scriptures does not lead to the understanding of God’s mystery; it is only through discerning intellect (bibek budhi) that one understands the Infinite. (AGGS, M1, p 148)
The highest achievement is the comprehension of Guru’s teachings through deliberation. (AGGS, M 1, p 904)
The Everlasting Almighty is realized through deliberation of Guru’s teachings. (AGGS, M 1, p 355)
On pages 22-23 he says, “Saktism is the doctrine of the worship of Sakti , the Primal Energy, which is conceived as the Female Principle of the evolving universe while Tantrism is the sum total of the modes of this worship. And the two, therefore, constitute the two sides of the same medal. Sakti has 1008 names, which is the number of creations and dissolutions of the universe before it is annulled into the utter void, mahaparlaya, as a prelude to new creation.”
While describing Sakti by her various names, he says, “Chinnamastika having a severed head, the form in which she killed the terrible demon, Nisumbha, refered to in Chandicritra [sic] of Guru Gobind Singh. And the form in which the celebrated Sikh martyr, Baba Dip Singh Sahid (A. D. 1758) fought and struck terror in the ranks of Pathan enemies of the Sikhs, near Amritsar.”
This statement clearly shows that he was a firm believer of Bipran literature and had no qualms about distorting Nanakian philosophy (Gurmat). Whereas Gurmat rejects the concept of gods and goddesses, Kapur Singh claims Sahid (martyr) Dip Singh was the reincarnation of goddess Chinnamastika. On page 36 he quotes Bachittar Natak describing Guru Gobind Singh’s descent into this phenomenal world of mundane affairs.
If Kapur Singh had taken the trouble to read the rest of Apni Katha (My Own Story) with an open mind, he would have realized that there are verses in this composition which repudiate the core of Sikh philosophy, contradict Sikh history, and are illogical. Moreover, analyses of the contents of Bachittar Natak on the touchstone of Gurmat and logic have shown unquivocally that Guru Gobind Singh can not be the author of Bachittar Natak [24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31].
On page 44 he has put words in Guru Gobind Singh’s mouth without providing any evidence: “Guru Gobind Singh clearly seemed to believe that aristocracy is one of the goals of democracy.”
On page 45- 46 he says, “ It is in this background that Guru Gobind Singh identifies God with Death and gives him the epithet of All-Steel. That this was in essence the idea is not in doubt when we read certain poetical compositions of contemporary poet such as Bhai Gurdas [Singh], who received the immediate impact of the idea and the living personality of Guru Gobind Singh on this occasion. The well known odes of Bhai Gurdas [Singh] are strongly reminiscent of the climate of the concluding stanzas of a poem by Percy Bysche Shelley.”
Here he lauds Bhai Gurdas Duja (second) and compares him to poet Shelley (The publisher of Varan Bhai Gurdas has used the epithet Duja to distinguish Kapur Singh’s “Bhai Gurdas Singh” from Bhai Gurdas). He has carefully selected the following verses to support his statement while ignoring others that are against Gurmat, malign the Khalsa order, and are inconsistent with Indian history
“Slowly and steadily, by the grace and order of the Timeless Being, the Gurus established the Khalsa order of “perfect men” with divine wisdom. In this way when the Singhs rose up roaringly the whole world trembled with fear. …Vedas, Puranas, six Shastaras and the Quran lost their importance. …Thus the third Panth (Order) of great and proud warriors was established. Hail! O Hail Guru Gobind Singh who was Guru and disciple at the same time. “
But the following verses of the same composition he ignored. For example: “Guru Gobind Singh prayed to Kalika (Kali Devi) before the initiation of the Khalsa order with the baptism of “Khande di Pahul.” Hail! O Hail Guru Gobind Singh who was the Guru and disciple at the same time. “ With a single verse the composer of the Var has repudiated Gurmat by making Guru Gobind Singh the worshiper of Kalika. Besides, the second verse distorts Sikh history, as it was Guru Nanak who was Guru and disciple at the same time (ape gur chela) when he transferred Guruship to Bhai Lehna and called him his own limb.
It heartening to know that Dr. Sangat Singh has taken note of these verses and this is what he says about the author, Bahi Gurdas Duja (second) [32].
“Koer Singh proved himself to be a successful infiltrator and subverter of Sikh theology. From the internal evidence, it is obvious that it was he who under the pen name of one Gurdas composed a Var (ode) and had it added as 41st Var to the compositions of Bhai Gurdas, which are considered as key to Adi Granth. In this Var , Gurdas sang of the sublimity of Khalsa baptism and hailed the unique place of Guru Gobind Singh as both the Guru and disciple at one and the same time. As a matter of fact, there was nothing new to this concept which was extant since Guru Nanak’s bowing before Lehna as his successor. Amidst his lyricism and wah wah (hail), he asserts that Guru Gobind Singh worshiped and appeased Kali on the eve of the creation of Khalsa.”
Moreover, Kapur Singh has ignored the following: Thus when the Singhs rose up roaringly with such a force the whole world trembled. Mausoleums, tombs, temples and mosques were raised to the ground. The Muslims were so afraid, that they stopped having circumcisions. Thus all the foolish followers of Mohamed were finally destroyed.
Is this consistent with Sikh ethics? Does it add to the glory of Khalsa? What could be more derogatory and insulting to the concept of Sant-Sipahi (saint-soldier)? Does it represent the historical truth? Isn’t it a deliberate effort by the devious writer to malign the noble Khalsa and to create hatred between Sikh and Muslims?
On page 51 he has interpreted an incomplete verse “sabat surat dastar sira”as: This mahapursha, the “Hindu Superman” is that which is referred to in the in the Guru Granth as the one who is fully integrated personality and whose head is crowned with a turban.
First, Kapur Singh used the incomplete verse, which is not the proper way to interpret Gurbani. Second, “sabat surat dastar sira” is a part of the last line of a shabad (stanza), which is entirely addressed by Guru Arjan Dev to a Muslim holy man of Abdal order. On pages 1083-1084 of AGGS, the four shabads of Guru Arjan are about Islamic beliefs and practices. “napak pak kar hadoor hdeesa sabat surat dastar sira” is the last verse of the following shabad.
“Make your first prayer praise of God; second, contentment; third, humility; fourth, seeking welfare of all and fifth, control over five passions (sex, anger, greed, attachment and ego). Such five prayers are the best. Seeing God in all is your perpetual prayer. Let the water pot in your hand be the cleansing of your inner-self by giving up bad actions. O faithful one, let your prayer call be that there is “One and Only” God.
“Earn your living by honest work. Clean you heart of prejudice and evil thoughts the way a river cleans itself of silt and debris. Israel (angel) does take one to hell, who earns a place in heaven by accepting pir’s (Guru’s) advice. Let your bodily actions be immaculate like the fidelity of a faithful wife. Enjoy those activities that will keep you focussed on God. Consider the differentiation between the holy and unholy as the teachings of Hadis. This is the way to become a “perfect man” (sabat surat) worthy of honor - bearing dastar (turban) on head. (AGGS, M 5, p 1084)
So it is clear without any shadow of doubt that this shabad is not about a “Hindu Superman”, instead, it is Guru Arjan counsel to a Muslim holy man about what it takes to become a “perfect man” worthy of honor from God.
On page 60, Kapur Singh claims that Jhatka is an ancient Hindu tradition for slaughtering animal for food. However, he doesn’t provide any evidence to support this statement. It should be noted that he quotes Al-Biruni frequently in his writings as he has done twice in this book (pages 166 and 266). Al-Biruni, the celebrated mathematician and astronomer, who came to India in the wake of invading forces of Mahmud of Ghazni in the eleventh century, spent many years studying Indian people and their customs. It is surprising that Kapur Singh ignored Al-Biruni’s observation that Hindus killed certain animals and birds for food by strangulation[33]. He also observed that Hindus do not cut body hair including the genitals[34].
As already pointed out, Kapur Singh used only those verses from the Var of Bhai Gurdas [Singh], which suited his purpose. Similarly, he ignored Al-Biruni’s observation that Hindus killed animals and birds for food by strangulation. This clearly demonstrates that he practiced “selective reading”, which is not done by objective and ethical scholars and writers.
On Page 75, while discussing the concept of “Cosmic Man” in other religions he says, “It is in this train of thought to which a reference is made in the Guru Granth, when it is declared that the Cosmic Man has beautiful nose and long uncut hair (suhne nak jin lamre vala), that this First Man has unshaved, untrimmed body with turban on head (bsabat surat dastar sira).”
First, it is improper to interpret Gurbani by combining few words from one verse with another verse about a different subject. Whereas “suhne nak jin lamre vala”( AGGS, p 567) describes the “Beauty” of the Creator manifest in creation and “sabat surat dastar sira” is part of a verse from a shabad which is Guru Arjan’s advice to a Muslim holy man. Here again he has misinterpreted the verse “suhne nak jin lamre vala” by ignoring the preceding verse “vada sahib hai aap alakh apara” (The Great Lord is Invisible and Infinite). Second, Guru Nanak did not assign any specific name or gender to God. Third, he has taken a single verse from a long shabad and has twisted its meaning to suit his views!
“The Great Lord is Invisible and Infinite. Following this verse, Guru Nanak says that the Creator is the source of all the beauty in the creation. O my dear friends, God’s splendor is seen in - amorous eyes, beautiful teeth, attractive nose, beautiful tresses and golden body… And in energetic, restive and charming playful maidens whose gait is like that of a carefree elephant and in the melodious and passionate songs of cuckoo. ” AGGS, M 1, p 567.
Similarly, in another composition Guru Nanak has used features, limbs, figures and faces to illustrate both the transcendent and immanent nature of God: Due to Your presence in all, You have thousands of eyes, yet being Formless, You have no eyes. You have thousands forms, yet You are Formless. AGGS, M 1, p 13.
Kapur Singh attributes the composition “mitar piare nu haal mureedan da kahna” to Guru Gobind Singh (p. 77).
Giani Bhag Singh has argued forcefully that the contents of this composition contradict the teachings of AGGS, therefore, Guru Gobind Singh can not be the author of this composition[35]. Even the language of this composition is not the Punjabi of Guru Gobind Singh’s time; it is a later version closer to modern Punjabi.
While elaborating on devas or luminous beings (supernatural beings), he says, “Human beings, in which clairvoyant vision is induced by namsimran or yogic dhyana or in whom such visions exist from by pre-birth spiritual discipline, are alone capable of seeing devas with physical human eyes. Sometimes the devas appear unexpectedly to ordinary human beings as well, as testified in the Hindu, the Buddhist, the Christian and the Muslim sacred literarture. The writer of these lines was blessed by such a vision at about 11 A. M. on a June day in 1947 at Lahore, when Baba Ram Sungh Kuka, in deva form, appeared to him and conversed with him” (p.91). I wonder how such a belief enhance our understanding of Gurmat. Moreover, he misinterprets Gurbani to support the existence of devas.
Nanak, those eyes are different, which see my Beloved. (AGGS, M 5, p. 577)
Here Guru Arjan is talking about God not devas or supernatural beings and “different eyes” is a metaphor for discerning intellect (bibek budhi).
Furthermore: “These possibilities about the nature of Time are clearly in the writings of Guru Gobind Singh, such as have survived and come down to us. The Matrix and the Ground of all these Times or Time-strata is God Himself and, therefore, He is Mahakal, the Great Time, the kal kale, ‘Time of Times’, and God is Time” (p.124). Here he attributes Bachitar Natak to Guru Gobind Singh and combines verses from Bachitar Natak and Jap to describe God as, Mahakal (the great Time) and kal kale (the Time of Times).
tah ham adhik tpassia sadhee
maankal kalka aradhee (Bachitar Natak, Dasam Granth, pp. 54-55)
namo kal kale. (Jap, Dasam Granth, p 3)
It is worth noting that he has completely ignored the first verse of the couplet from Bachittar Nanatk and taken only Mahakal from the second verse and combined it with a verse from Jap to describe God as, Mahakal (the great Time) and kal kale (the Time of Times). He paid no attention to Kalika that comes after Mahakal.
Now let us look at the meaning of the two verses from Bachitar Natak.
The Punjabi dictionary defines tpassia as devotion, adoration, worship, penance, austerity and self-mortification.
Then I performed arduous austerity and worshiped Mahakal and Kalika. Nanakian philosophy (Gurmat) unequivocally rejects the concept of tpassia. For example:
By themselves the four – pilgrimage, austerity, compassion and charity earn little spiritual merit.
(AGGS, Jap 21, p 4)
Nanakian philosophy disapproves very strongly the practice of celibacy, asceticism, pilgrimage, ritual bathing, austerities, self-mortification, self-torture and mutilation of body in the pursuit of God.
If celibacy leads to salvation then why doesn’t the eunuch realize God?
(AGGS, Kabir, p 324)
If one were to become a great ascetic by practicing extreme austerity or were ready to offer body to the sacred fire or were to give gold, horses, elephants and land in charity or were to practice many Yogic techniques or were to practice self-mortification like Jain monks or were to sacrifice body piece by piece, still one wont’ be free from haumain (self-centeredness).
(AGGS, M, 5, p 265)
In Hindu Trinity Brahma is the creator, Vishnu is the caretaker and Shiva is the destroyer of creation. In Hindu scriptures Shiva is called Mahakal (great death) and Kalika is another name of Kali Devi (black goddess). In Bhachitar Nantak, both the words are used in the same sense. However, when Kapur Singh interprets Mahakal as “Time of Time”, he does not pay any attention to Kalika. His writings display the attitude: I will interpret the way I want, I do not care what the Guru or anyone else says. I call this the “Jat attitude”.
Ranjha’s indifference to the code of conduct of a yogi is a perfect example of “Jat attitude”. After accepting Ranjha as his disciple Bal Nath told him the dos and don’ts for a yogi. One of the don’ts is that a yogi is not supposed to look at the face of woman, rather he should keep his glance at her feet and address her as mother. Hearing this Ranjha’s replied in a thundering tone,
je main janda ishak thin manhan karna tere tile te dhar nan marda main
Had I known that there is an injunction against loving a woman, I would not have even pissed on your hill station (tila)[33].
Ranjha forced Bal Nath to retreat and pray for his success in getting back his Heer.
On page 195, Kapur Singh states, “A Singh is one who has reached the goal, who has realized the Self, and whose self, therefore, no more, whose ego and little personality are shed off and destroyed, and who thus has no proper particular name and so is designated by the genric term, Singh, so long as he is active in the social and political context of the Sikh Way of life. The term ‘Sikh’ implies a person who is a learner, who is set on the path of spiritual perfection and Self-realization, but who has not yet fully realized the Self, who has not yet found the Truth in entirety, and who, therefore, cannot be designated a tathagata or a Singh. When a Sikh has reached that final goal and he has ceased acting with the fulcrum of his little ego, he becomes a Singh, the perfect one. Guru Gobind Singh has, said so: A member of the Khalsa, a Singh, is one who is in constant communication with the living God, without a thought of the other, who is an embodiment of pure love and faith, … and within whom there is not but the One and Only God, he is awakened to discrimination between the Real and the unreal.”
Here Kapur Singh’s differentiation between a Sikh and a Singh is nothing less than subversion of the core of Nanakian philosophy. It is this type of thinking that has shattered the cohesiveness of the Sikh community. Ignorant or devious or swindler sant / babas (country preachers), too, differentiate between Sikhs and Sings the same way Kapur Singh does. Almost all the fights over the control of Gurdwaras are due to differentiation between Sikhs and Singhs endorsed by people like Kapur Singh.
Contrary to what Kapur Singh says, Nanakian philosophy (Gurmat) lays emphasis on the unity of all under “One and Only” God.
Those who enjoy living in harmony with God’s Hukam (Divine Law), overcome the temptations of the material world. Nanak, such is the True Guru (God), who brings all together. (AGGS, M, 1, p 72)
On the opening page of AGGS, in the first stanza of Japu, Guru Nanak has very clearly described the purpose of human life wherein lies the “all inclusive definition of a Sikh.”
How can one become a sachiara (truthful one), Godlike (gurmukh). (But, what prevents one from becoming a sachiara? It is the shroud of ignorance and falsehood, which prevents one from seeing the Truth. How can one remove this shroud?) “By understanding Hukam (Divine Law) and living in harmony with it,” proclaims Nanak
What is needed to understand Hukam? It is knowledge, more knowledge and more knowledge based on
“Truth.” So a sachiara is the one who understands the Hukam, God-centered (gurmukh) person.
Further on in the next stanza Guru Nanak says:
The entire creation is subject to Hukam and nothing is beyond it. Nanak, who understands the Hukam, is liberated from Haumai (self-centeredness).
So contrary to Kapur Singh’s assertion a sachiara is free from Haumai. Moreover, AGGS emphasizes and urges again and again, page after page that it is the interior not the exterior, which counts in the realization of God. A gurmukh is a gurmukh, it does not matter, what labels we may use for him, whether, Sikh or Singh or Khaksa. Guru Arjan has expressed a similar view regarding the name of God.
“Everlasting One” is your primordial name, but tongue describes You by the names given by people. (AGGS, M,1, p 1083)
Now let us examine the implication of Kapur Singh’s statements about “Sikh” and “Singh”. Had Guru Gobind Singh and the five “Beloved Ones” not fully realized the Self, or not found the Truth in entirety before being baptized as Singhs? Were Guru Nanak’s successors - Bhai Lehna, Bhai Amardas and others not one with God before assuming Guruship? Did Bhai Mati Das, Bhai Sati Das, Bhai Dyayla and Bhai Kanhya not realize their Self, or found the Truth in entirety because they were unable to shed off their Haumai?
Now let us examine the meaning of Sikh as defined in AGGS.
One who learns the lesson of Guru’s thoughts, crosses the ocean of worldly temptations with God’s grace.
(AGGS, M 1, p 465)
Divine knowledge is like an immortalizing nectar, one who absorbs it in his mind, gets the benefit of pilgrimage to 68 sacred Hindu centers. (Here Guru Nanak advises us that pilgrimage to so-called holy places is a futile effort for spiritual development. On the contrary it is the Word (Divine knowledge) that unites one with God.). Guru’s teachings are like precious gems and pearls, a Sikh who searches the teachings with dedication discovers the wealth of wisdom (AGGS, M 1, p 1328).
Hey brother, a Sikh who follows Guru’s teachings with devotion is a friend and relative of the Guru. One who is self-centered suffers due alienation from the Guru.
(AGGS, M 3, p 601)
Hey Gursikh (Sikh of the Guru) friend, follow the path of the Guru and accept whatever the Guru says as beneficial, as his narrative of the Divine is unique.
(AGGS, M4, p 667)
A devotee who has complete faith in Guru’s teachings comes to understand the Almighty.
(AGGS, M 5, p 287)
A Sikh learns from the perfect Guru that God is the protector of the weak and sustainer of all. A Sikh also learns that when the Guru becomes one with the Sikh and the Sikh become one with the Guru, then the Sikh becomes disseminator of Guru’s teachings (AGGS, M 4, p 444).
This is what happened to Bhai Lehna, when he became one with Guru Nanak. Guru Nanak called him his “own limb” and appointed him as his successor. This process was repeated until the tenth Nanak conferred Guruship jointly on the teachings of AGGS and the corporate boy of the Sikh community (Panth).
From the above discussion it quite clear that Kapur Singh’s statement “The term ‘Sikh’ implies a person who is a learner, who is set on the path of spiritual perfection and Self-realization, but who has not yet fully realized the Self, who has not yet found the Truth in entirety, and who, therefore, cannot be designated a tathagata or a Singh. When a Sikh has reached that final goal and he has ceased acting with the fulcrum of his little ego, he becomes a Singh, the perfect one.” is fallacious.
He has translated (pp. 286-88) the opening lines of Ardas (Sikh congregational prayer) approved by Shiromni Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee as:
sri bhagauti ji sahae
pritham bhagaiti....
“Formless-form, to God, the abiding Victory.
Var Sri Bhagauti, composition of the 10th King.
To begin with, we invoke the Divine spirit of God and we remember Guru Nanak.
On page 286 he says, “The opening part of this prayer, relating to the invocation of the nine predecessor Gurus, is an excerpt from a Punjabi composition of Guru Gobind Singh. It is called Var Sri Bhagauti Ji Ki , which is an abbreviated metrical version of a chapter of Markandeypurana called Durgasaptasati, seven hundred verses of which have been condensed into 55 stanzas.”
If VarSri Bhagauti Ji Ki is an abbreviated Punjabi version of Durgasaptasa then from where did the first stanza come as the Markandeypurana was written long before the time of Sikh Gurus. This means the writer of Var Sri Bhagauti Ji Ki interpolated it and that writer, according to Kapur Singh, was Guru Gobind Singh.
Did Kapur Singh not realize that kachi bani (apocryphal composition) and interpolation was denounced by the Gurus and it is considered unethical even today! Others who have studied VarSri Bhagauti Ji Ki have concluded that it is not the composition of Guru Gobind Singh as its contents are not consistent with teachings of AGGS [37, 38]. For example, “The words, ‘Padshahi 10’ have been used to deceive Sikhs into believing that these are the words used in supplication (Ardas) to the Almighty. Since the whole Var is dedicated to the goddess Chandi, there is no reason to believe that the first Pauri is not so intended. If Guru Gobind Singh is not the author of 54 of the Pauris, he can’t be the author of the first Pauri either, the one that begins with ‘pritham bhgauti simarka’. This is confirmed by Bhai Kahan Singh’s explanation of the term Bhgauti in Mahan Kosh.[39]. So this form of Ardas from the first Pauri (stanza) of the Ballad has been foisted on the Sikhs just by adding the words ‘Padshahi 10’ to the title. We don’t know just when this form was introduced. It must have come up after the death of Bhai Mani Singh, at the time these so-called Bachittar Natak Granths first surfaced,” says Tharam Singh[38].
Kapur Singh has translated the first and the third line but omitted the second line, but why? And he has translated the opening of the fourth line pritham bhagauti as, to begin with we invoke the Divine spirit of God. He does not provide any evidence where he learned or found that bhagauti means Divine spirit of God.
To understand the meaning of any word or expression in reference to Sikhism, one should find out how this word or expression has been used in AGGS, the only authentic source of Sikhism. In case the word is not found in AGGS then one should search its meaning in other languages or religions. The word “bhagauti” has been used in AGGS only few times and it means devotee, not God. For example:
bhgauti bhagwant bhagat ka rang
sagal tiagai dust ka sang.
A devotee who is drenched in God’s love gives up all bad habits and influences.
Bhagauti means devotee (bhagat), bhagwant means God, and bhagti means love for God. Literally speaking the first line means: devotee is dyed in the color of God. Devotee is in deep love with God.” “sagal dust” means all bad habits and influences (AGGS, M 5, p 274).
However, in Hinduism, as pointed out by Bhai Kahan Singh Nabha, bhagauti means goddess Bhagvati, so Kapur Singh is misleading Sikhs when he translates bhagauti as Divine spirit of God. For example, Professor Harinder Singh Menboob has made a similar observation about Kapur Singh’s exposition of Sikhism.
“Hundreds of Sikh intellectuals of the twentieth century who are the product of English education system, Kapur Singh I. C. S. being the foremost, have been trying to interpret the spiritual mystery of gurbani in the light of external similarity of Hindu concepts” [40].
“Majority of the Sikh intellectuals while explaining the purpose of the creation of the Khalsa and interpreting the essence of Aad Guru Granth Sahib have limited the insight of the Panth (Sikh community) within the parameters of Hindu history, literature and mythology. For example, many publications of scholars from universities, the Faridkoti annotation of Guru Granth Sahib, and The Baisakhi of Guru Gobind Singh by Kapur Singh I. C. S fall in this category” [41].
Professor Puran Singh the mystic poet has expressed similar views:
The words Brahman (Braham) and Para-Braham also come in Guru Granth, but as Cunningham says “by way of illustration only”. Similarly, the names of all gods and goddesses of Brahminical Pantheon. It is to be regretted that Sikh and Hindu scholars are interpreting Guru Nanak in the futile terms of the color he used, the brush he took; are analysing the flesh of his words and dissecting the texts to find the Guru’s meaning to be the same as of the Vedas and Upanishads! Dead words are used to interpret the fire of the Master’s soul! [42]
Finally, people often ask, weren’t appropriate words from AGGS or Punjabi language sufficient instead of “National Professor of Sikhism” title for Kapur Singh? One could write a treatise on this speculative question. But it is suffice to say that Sharomani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC), an elected body of the Sikhs, which manages historical gurdwars in Punjab, Haryana, and Himachal Pardesh conferred this title on him. One may ask who chose the title?
SGPC was supposed to promote genuine research on Sikhism to remove the contradictions in Sikh literature about Gurmat and Sikh history and to educate Sikh masses in Gurmat. Unfortunately, after 1947 it has degenerated into an organisation of semi-literate boors who have very little understanding of Sikhism. Their knowledge of Sikhism is limited to the reading of scriptures and the narration of absurd, fantastic, miraculous and chimeric tales from spurious literature like janam-sakhis.
SGPC’s relationship to Sikhism is the same as that of a land revenue collector with farming. Their sole agenda is to control the golak (moneybox for offerings). Moreover, it has become a tool in the hands of amoral, corrupt and criminal politicians, who use it for their personal benefits. So it is foolhardy to expect any guidance from SGPC as far as research on Sikhism is concerned.
The environment for research on of Sikhism in the academia is also not healthy. Quite often what goes on under the name of Guru Nanak Studies or Sikh Studies is deplorable and disgusting. For example, some of the faculty and even the vice-chancellors of Guru Nanak Dev University (GNDU) were involved in undermining Guru Nanak’s teachings and the authenticity of Adi Granth (Kartarpuri Bir).
Parasaraprasna was edited Prof. Piar Singh and Prof. Madanjit Kaur, who retired as Head of the Department of Guru Nanak Studies at GNDU. It is surprising that they made only one minor editorial comment in spite of the fact Parasaraprasna is full of glaring contradictions and absurd statements. Vice-Chancellor G. S. Randhawa, who wrote the pithy foreword, patted them on the back for a job well done.
It is well known that Piar Singh appeared at the Akal Takhat in April 1993 to atone for his controversial work, Gatha Sri Aad Granth, published by GNDU in 1992,which challenged the authenticity of the Adi Granth (Kartarpuri Bir). The sale of the book was banned by the order of Akal Takhat in December 1992. However, Gatha Sri Adi Granth and the Controversy was published in 1995 by Dr Jaswant Singh, a close friend of Professor Pashaura Singh of the University of Michigan, through Anant Education and Rural Development Foundation, Inc, Michigan, USA, and the banned book is also available with him. Both Parasaraprasna and Gatha Sri Aad Granth were published by GNDU in 1988 and 1992, respectively, when G. S. Randhawa was the Vice-Chancellor.
Piar Singh’s book is based on his research on GNDU manuscript no. 1245 (MS # 1245) of unknown authorship and procured from unknown sources by him and sold in collusion with manuscript dealers, Chawla Brothers to GNDU [43]. Pashaura Singh also used this manuscript for his Ph.D. thesis under the direction of Professor McLeod. Prof. Balwant Singh Dhillon of GNDU asserts that the Vice-Chancellor of GNDU, Harbhajan Singh Soch was helping a foreign based scholar by providing him with photocopies of MS #1245 while forbidding him to make photocopies of the same for his research work[44].
“In December 1995, the then vice-chancellor of Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, disallowed me to obtain photostat copies of some folios of MS # 1245 that I needed badly for my present study. Yet prior to that, this very gentleman had, in a very clandestine manner carried a microfilm of this very manuscript to America, at the expense of university exchequer, for a foreign based Sikh scholar. Subsequent events have shown that this had probably been done deliberately for promoting certain scholars to establish a particular point of view to put the very authenticity of the Adi Guru Granth Sahib - the eternal Guru of the Sikh community to doubt. “
It is unbelievable that the very institution that was established in honour of Guru Nanak is involved in destroying the uniqueness of his philosophy. For example, Dr. McLeod has indulged in gross distortion of Guru Nanak’s teaching[45]. It is shocking to find out that the “Teachings of Guru Nanak” section of Guru Nanak and the Sikh Religion was translated into Punjabi as Guru Nanak De Udesh and published by GNDU in 1974[46]. Besides, a summary of the English version was for a time distributed at the Golden temple in Amritsar (presumably without McLeod’s name) [46]. Who was responsible for this abomination?
Punjabi University is not lagging behind GNDU in this respect as some of its faculty is also doing the same thing what their counterparts are doing at GNDU. For example, Prof. Gurbhagat Singh and Prof. Jodh Singh claim in their writings that Guru Gobind Singh is the author of Dasam Granth. I don’t agree with them and my views on Dasam Granth are there for all to read.
Conclusion
I will leave up to the readers to draw their own conclusions about Kapur Singh’s scholarship. They have to decide for themselves whether Kapur Singh was a great thinker of the 20th century, an eminent scholar, and Bhai Gurdas of our times?
REFERENCES
1 Virk, K. S. (Punjabi. Sachittar Kaumi Ekta, New Delhi, March 1976, p 11.
Cunningham, J. D. History of the Sikhs, reprint, 1996, p viii.
2 Shah, W. Heer Warasshah (Punjabi). Bhai Jawahar Singh Kirpal Singh and Co., p 107.
3 Singh, G. Waryam Mard – Sirdar Kapur Singh (Punjabi), Sikh Virsa, March 2003, p 30-31.
4 Singh, K. Sachi Sakhi (Punjabi), Navyug Publishers, 1979.
5 Singh, K. Parasaraprasna. Ed. Piar Singh and Madanjit Kaur, Guru Nanak Dev University, 1989.
6 Singh, U. Sikh Homeland Kina Ku Sanbhav (Punjabi) Sachitar Kaumi Ekta, Jan. 1976, p 25-26.
7 Selected Documents on Partition of Punjab, 1947, Ed. Kirpal Singh, National Bookshop 1991, pp 9, 55.
8 Singh, G. Why Dr. Ambedkar could not embrace Sikhism, Spokesman, October 1997, p 33-36.
9 Singh, S. The Sikhs in History, 4th ed., 2oo1, Uncommon Books, p 203-204.
10 Chatterjee, C. The Trust Betrayed: The Sikh Minority and the Indian State, (1946-1966), The Sikh Review, 2004, 52 (12), 37-48.
11 Banga, H. S. Sirdar Kapur Singh ate Samkali Akali Nitivan (Punjabi), Sikh Virsa, March 2003, pp 32-35.
12 Singh, A. Tozuk-e-Jehangiri misquoted in Dr. Hari Ram Gupta’s History of the Sikhs. The Sikh Review, 2003, 51 (3), pp 40-43.
13 Mehboob, H. S. Sehje Rachio Khalsa (Punjabi), 2nd ed., Singh Brothers, 2000, pp 541-556.
14 Ibid, pp 556-567.
15 Singh, S. The Sikhs in History, 4th ed., Uncommon Books, 2001, p19; Grewal, J. S. The Sikhs of the Punjab, Cambridge University Press (first paperback ed.), 1994, p31; Singh, Jagjit, The Sikh Revolution: A Perspective View, 4th reprint, Bahri Publications, 1998, p 105.
16 Singh, K. Punjab da batwara ate Sikh neta. Sachittar Kaumi Ekta, New Delhi, Jan. 1976, p 36-37.
17 Singh, B. Meaning of Hindu, Sikh Virsa, March 203, pp 57-58.
18 Singh, I. For those with feet of clay: A short Critique of Khushwant Singh. The Sikh Review, 2003, 51 (3), p 49-51.
19 Bipran Literature: Literature that distorts Sikhism. After the death of Guru Gobind Singh, the foes of Sikh philosophy created “Bipran Literature” in the 18th and 19th century to accomplish two objectives. First, to subvert Sikhism in a way so as to make it a part and parcel of Hinduism, and second to destroy the cordial relations, which existed between Sikhs and the Muslim populace up to the time of Guru Gobind Singh. Recently Hindus, especially organizations like the RSS have started claiming Sikhs as Kesadhari Hindus and Sikhism a sect of Hinduism on the basis of the writings of people like Kapur Singh and Piara Singh Padam. Sikhs who believe in such writings find themselves trapped in the snare laid down for them by Bipran writes. Instead of refuting the arguments of Hindus on the basis of Gurbani, they are indulging in empty slogans, emotional outbursts and noisy demonstrations. They blame the clergy and politicians, whereas the real culprits are the so-called “Sikh writers and theologians.” It must have been a rude awakening to those Sikh writers, who go on repeating like a parrot “Bachittar Natak is Guru Gobind Singh’s autobiography ” when RSS chief Sudarshan asserted in Chandigarh, “Right now Dasam Granth is installed at Hazoor Sahib and Patna Sahib - and in the near future it will be installed in other Gurdwaras - and after that the difference between Hindus and Sikhs would disappear.” I think the Sikh community, particularly, the writers and custodians of Sikhism should be thankful to Mr. Sudarshan for hitting them on the head with a shoe to awaken them from deep slumber.
20 Singh, B. Dasam Granth Darpan, 2 nd. Print, 2001, p 12 13.
21 Singh, K. Sachi Sakhi (Punjabi), Navyug Publishers, 1979, p 69-70.
22 Singh, B. Misinterpretation of Gurbani by W. H. McLeod, Part I, Understanding Sikhism Res. J. 2002, 4 (2), 32-36; Abstracts of Sikh Studies, 2003, 5 (2), pp 72-80.
23 Singh, B. Singh, B. Misinterpretation of Gurbani by W. H. McLeod, Part II, Abstracts of Sikh Studies, 2003, 5 (3), pp 66-78.
24 Kala Afghana, G. S. Bachitar Natak Gurbani Di Kusvati Te (Punjabi), Sri Akal Sahai Society, 1999.
![baldev](javascript:openWin("http://www.sikhspectrum.com/images/baldev.jpg"))