SikhSpectrum.com Quarterly Issue No. 18, November 2004
Who am I?
by Jarnail Singh
The ordinary Sikh is in a dilemma. He is in search of his home - the place he belongs to. The place where he can enjoy the nectar of Gurbani, practise his faith, and attain the eternal bliss as promised in Gurbani. To his amazement he finds Sikhs divided in two camps. This is the dilemma. This is his ordeal. Sikhs in both camps claim to be true Sikhs.
In one camp belong those Sikhs who adorn all 5Ks and look like perfect Sikhs. Most of them are followers of a Dera or a Sant. When he goes closer to these Sikhs he finds that most of them believe in miracles and have fallen in the deep pit of janter, manter, jap and tap. In short, voodoo and superstition. Guru Nanak travelled thousands of miles, went through unspeakable hardship to bring Sikhs out of this deep pit. Ironically, however, we have plunged right back into it.
By abandoning rational thinking or vivek budh we have woven an intricate web of magic and miracles around the lives of our Gurus that the real import and meaning of Gurbani eludes us. How can we believe in stories about our Gurus that contradict their teachings? Some of these stories go to the extent of character assassination in the guise of miracles. Some Gurdwaras now follow practices that go against the teachings of our Gurus. These Gurdwaras have turned into places for idol worship instead of Shabad Vichaar. Even the Guru has warned us that going to a Gurdwara is of no if it is not to indulge in Shabad Vichaar (jab lag sabad na bhadia kion sohe gurduar- p. 19).
Shabad Vichaar has been reduced to stories of miracles interspersed with some lines from Gurubani quoted out of context to suit the agenda of the storyteller. Some Gurdwaras follow rituals marayada (conduct). Marayada is often changed to suit the whims of dera chiefs (pseudo-sants) with the help of cooked up stories about the lives of our Gurus. In some places these “chiefs” is given more importance than Guru Granth Sahib. Guru Granth Sahib is only a titular head, and it is the sant or the chief who dictates the terms.
To the other camp belong those people who say they don’t have to wear the 5Ks to be a Sikh. No one can recognise them as Sikhs just by looking at them. They can be easily mistaken for followers of any other faith. But they still claim to be Sikhs, and some of them go to the extent of saying that although they do not look like Sikhs they are in fact the “real Sikhs”. They claim to have understood the message of Guru Nanak in its “real sense”. Some even claim to be followers of Guru Nanak and refuse to accept Guru Gobind Singh. In their opinion the concept of 5Ks is now obsolete.
These people consider themselves as torchbearers of the “new age” Sikhi. To them the Sikh appearance is superfluous. They would rather do good deeds and leave it at that. But, in reality, many among them conveniently refuse to act like Sikhs. They expect those who look like Sikhs to first set a good example. If they are convinced about their good deeds then they will think about it and do something about it. They think they are more intelligent than the Guru who could not visualise that in the modern time 5Ks are not needed. They claim to be great rational thinkers.
They count Gursikhs like Bhai Mardana, Bhai Nand Lal and Bhai Ghanya on their side since they do not have Singh in their names. They say that Sikhism is the latest religion compatible with modern science but 5Ks is the most conservative and retrogressive part of it. There was a time when the Guru asked for the head and many Sikhs were ready to die for him. These people are responsible for sending mixed message as regards Sikhi.
Both camps have some striking similarities, however. They follow their own mind, and believe in their own wisdom. They don’t realize the need to subjugate our minds to the will of the Guru and to sacrifice our wisdom at altar of Gurmat (Guru’s wisdom). Essentially, they are two sides of the same coin. Both groups have infected the beautiful tree of Sikhi, and the ordinary Sikh desperately waits for Spring hoping to see the tree blossom. There actions are making it easy for some to give up the faith altogether.
It will be in order here to relate the story of my own village. I come from a small village in Punjab. As a kid I remember vividly going to our Gurdwara. It was housed in a small room. The Gurdwara was always filled with Sikhs some of them with all the 5Ks. In contrast, the Gurdwara is now a big and beautiful building, but only a few people are in the village keep the Sikh appearance. People from so called lower castes have reverted to Hinduism, and one Jat family has embraced Chritianity. The youth is addicted to drugs, and there is a liquor shop in the village. Every evening there are more people in the liquor shop than in the Gurdwara.
Those who manage the Gurdwara are drug addicts, and do not even keep one K on them. As far as I can remember, nobody from the SGPC has ever visited our village Gurdwara, and they have never sent any parcharak (literature). However, preachers of other sects and deras have visited the village. Akhand Paath was a rare occasion but now there is Akhand series of Akhand Paath at the Gurudwara. Probably there is not even a single person in the village who has done Sehaj Path himself at home.
II
A rebuttal was written in response to the article Who am I? by Bawa Singh Jagdev that was published in the June-July 2004 issue of The Sikh Bulletin ( American edition). The Sikh Bulletin refused to publish it due to “lack of space”.-- Author
At the outset I must admit that I was taken in by the title Who am I? I thought it answered the metaphysical question Sufi poet Bulleh Shah raised in his poetry, but to my utter dismay it turned out to be mutterings of a confused mind. The author starts with a popular truism -- God created human beings in His own image -- and asserts that Gurbani or AGGS support this view. This is absolutely wrong.
Gurbani does not say or support the view that God created human beings in his own image. On the other hand Gurbani says that the entire cosmos is the creation and an image of God who permeates it. It is further stated that human are expected to follow the Guru’s advice, which tells them how to distinguish between right and wrong. However, ironically, the author spends all his energy to prove that dictates of Guru Gobind Singh about 5Ks are now obsolete and it is better if Sikhs disregard them.
Jagdev gives us another surprise when he describes Amritdhari, Sahajdhari and Patit as castes among Sikhs. Casteism is a specific characteristic of the Indian society and the introduction of 5Ks was one of the many steps our Gurus took to eradicate this disease from the Indian subcontinent. But in the opinion of this author, 5Ks being the main “cause of casteism” among Sikhs we should ignore the dictates of the tenth Master. It highlights Bawa Singh Jagdev’s ignorance of the Indian caste system. He is confusing caste with appearance.
All Sikhs who say that it is required of a Sikh to be “saabat soorat” (in the full appearance of a Sikh) are accused of “creating divisions in humanity”. It does not require much reasoning to the obvious irrationality in such a claim. The idea of saabat soorat has been preached and practised by all Sikh Gurus, and it is wrong to claim that it is being preached by a section of Sikhs. Indeed it is an indisputable fact that saabat soorat is the natural appearance, and if any one is guilty of dividing humanity it is the people who alter this natural appearance. Not surprisingly the author is disturbed by some of his questions because he is seeking answers to these questions from his own biased mind. If he had gone to the shelter of the Guru, he would have definitely found convincing answers by studying and contemplating on AGGS.
AGGS clearly states that outward appearance has no connection whatsoever with the spiritual progress of a person. Appearance, however, is like the uniform that kids wear when they go to the school. The uniform at school does not help in any way in becoming more intelligent in studies. But this does not mean that a uniform has got no significance for the school or for the students. In the same way the saabat soorat appearance has its own significance and is indispensable for a Sikh. The kesh is often described as the stamp of our Guru. A stamp on a document is the proof of its authenticity and it tells us about its origin. The stamp in itself is not the document; nor does the stamp changes in any way what is written in the document.
For example any document with a stamp of Singh Sabha International (SSI) would tell us that this is an authentic document from SSI. Whatever has been written in the document is to be judged on the basis of the constitution and objectives of SSI. In the same way actions of all people with the Sikh appearance should be judged on the touchstone of AGGS. Any document, even though it is absolutely in accordance with the constitution and objectives of SSI, will require the SSI stamp to authenticate it. In the same way a person is required to have the saabat soorat stamp to be recognized as a Sikh.
Jagdev is right in saying that purity and perfection in life does not come by having kesh etc. What Jagdev forgot was that not keeping kesh does not guarantee either purity or perfection. All good persons are not necessarily Sikhs; all Sikhs are not always good. Sikhism has a history of recognizing and honoring good people from all religions and cultures. What is really strange is the insistence of those who abandon Sikh appearance to be recognised, called, and accepted as real Sikhs. If these people were good, Sikhism would still recognize their goodness even if they were not Sikhs.
It has been stated at many places in AGGS that what matters in the end is not your appearance but good deeds. If a person who is saabat soorat and claims to be Sikh is doing something, which is not in accordance with the teachings of our Gurus then he should be exposed and brought to book. It is ridiculous and absurd to give examples of such persons to build a case for discarding the Sikh appearance. There are bad people everywhere. If people in uniform do something against the law, then it is never recommended that the uniform should be discarded. Those who commit a crime while in uniform are punished as per the law. The same rule should apply here. Why throw away the baby with the bath water?
If a Sikh is not following the advice of AGGS, then he should be punished as per the Sikh tenets or the rule of the land. Our distinct appearance is a must to become a Sikh, but we do not become a Sikh just by having the appearance. Sikhs must follow the teachings of AGGS in our lives without which we are not complete.
The author calls saabat soorat “an age old culturally defined traditions and symbol” that destroys the universal appeal of Sikhism. He admits that the basic tenets of Sikhism are eternal and immutable but does not describe what these tenets are. In his opinion culture and traditions change with time and the underlying message is that Sikhs should also change with time and abdicate their distinct appearance. In his opinion our Gurus also changed with time. This position has serious implications as it contradicts what we read in AGGS that all the ten Gurus preached and practiced the same philosophy. He gives some funny examples to prove his point.
In Jagdev’s opinion Guru Nanak never adopted the use of arms, but later Guru Hargobind and Guru Gobind Singh took to arms. This only underscores his ignorance of Sikh philosophy. I would like to ask him this question: Did Guru Nanak ever preached non violence? The second example given by him is the escape of Guru Gobind Singh discarding what he calls Sikh uniform and disguising as a Muslim pir. Did Guru Gobind Singh discard saabat soorat to disguise as a Muslim pir? What does Jagdev have to say about it? This escape from the battlefield at Chamkour is singular example of extraordinary courage and exemplary military planning and strategy.
It is praiseworthy and heartening to note that the author helps foreign students to learn more about Sikhism. However he appears to have ignored the most conspicuous aspect of Sikhism, our distinct appearance. Could this be a reason why his students have so many misgivings about the external Sikh identity? To say that Sikh, Singh, and Khalsa are different categories of Sikhs is wrong. As per his own definition of a Singh, Jagdev should not have Singh in his name.
His assertion that the suffix Singh was added to the names of only those Sikhs who joined Guru Gobind Singh’s army to fight against Aurangzeb is absurd and ridiculous, and shows that he has poor knowledge of Sikh history. He contradicts himself in the next line when he says that one of the reasons of this addition or change in name was to get rid of the caste system. So if we combine the two statements it should mean that Guru Gobind Singh wanted to eradicate casteism only from those Sikhs who joined his army. I wonder what will be his answer to the student if she were to ask him why he has a “Singh” in his name.
For those who are naïve, I believe not many people fall in this category, the implicit message here is that the teachings of Guru Gobind Singh and Guru Nanak are contradictory. It looks like that the author has not tried to understand the concept of Amrit and Khalsa as described in AGGS. This, in my opinion, is the main reason for all the confusion in his mind. He is confusing amrit with Khande-di-Pahul. Amrit as per AGGS is the teachings of Gurbani, and we drink it when we follow these teachings in life. Patit, Sehajdhari, Amritdhari are, ideally speaking, stages in the spiritual development of a Sikh.
However those who have taken Khande-di-Pahul are often called Amridharis because they are supposed to follow the teachings of Gurbani just as we call all kids wearing a school uniform are called students. There are kids who wear the school uniform, but instead of going to the school they miss classes and go elsewhere. Similarly there can be, and there are people, who have taken Khande-di-Pahul but have not been able to drink Amrit. The performance of a student is not judged by his uniform but by what he scores in the examination. Similarly, our Guru has told us in no uncertain terms that a Sikh will be judged, not by his appearance, but on the basis of his or her actions in life.
It is the opinion of Bawa Singh Jagdev that “religion is not a game for which rules can be set once for all.” However only a couple of paragraphs earlier, he stated that tenets of Sikhism are eternal and immutable. He then goes on to say that it is the personal choice of a person to keep kesh or not, and no one has the right to interfere in this choice. It is fine and I have no objection to a person’s choice to keep or not to keep kesh. My objection is when such a person insists to be recognized as Sikh of the Guru, who made it mandatory for his Sikhs to to keep a distinct appearance. The author refers to the dress code time and again in his article.
From my own knowledge there is no dress code except the underwear and turban (for males only) prescribed for Sikhs. These items easily fit in with any clothes. A Sikh from Africa, North and South America, Europe, and Asia is not expected to wear clothes particular to the Punjab region of the Indian sub-continent. So the ire of the author on this point is misdirected and unwarranted. Although I agree with him that some vested interests have reduced 5Ks to mere rituals, it should not prevent us from educating the world on the significance of these things. Why discard them or compare them with rituals of other religions?
Jagdev has expressed his fear that future generations will read about Sikhs only in the history books and rings a wake up call for every Sikh. In my opinion it would have happened long time ago but for the introduction of the 5Ks. Our history testifies to my claim. Our Gurus were great visionaries. They put their final seal on AGGS in such a manner that no one can alter or interpolate in it. Similarly they have made saabat soorat appearance our registered trademark and patented it for us for all times to come.
Asaabat soorat Sikh is required to follow in his life what is written in AGGS. He or she can be questioned and punished if they do not follow it. Can we ask people who has discarded the 5Ks their actions are not in accordance with the teachings of AGGS? They can reply back, “it is my personal life and none of your business”. Only a Sikh is accountable if he or she fails to follow the teachings of AGGS, because only by following the message of our Gurus do we become a Sikh.
In the end I feel it is my duty to confess that I am not an “Amritdhari” Sikh. I can be easily described as a patit or some may be generous enough to call me a Sehajdhari. I can only say that I am on my journey of becoming a Sikh. So whatever I have written above is not an attempt to justify my appearance.
![jGB](javascript:openWin("http://www.sikhspectrum.com/images/jarnails.jpg"))