Comments and Feedback on Issue No. 18, November 2004

from Dilbadshah Singh
Place: Glossop, United Kingdom

Among the Sikh people there exists the Bhat (Bhatra Sikhs). Amongst themselves they refer to themselves as sangat. Upon further questions they will tell you that their origins are from Sangla-deep and from a place called Beeza-qur (pronounced such) and they will inform you that they are the original sangat of Guru Nanak. Apart from speaking various dialects of Punjabi they still possess a language which they only speak amongst themselves. In and around Sangladeep there are hindus who still speak this language.

Further if you look at the bir of Bhanno (Adi Granth) you will find the name of shivabh but more importantly you will find Bhatra sikhs being mentioned. Is this proof we still have living Sikh whose descendants are from the South or from Shri Lanka.

Sikhs sometimes do injustice to themselves in not recognising who still walks amongst their own communities.

from Rajinder Singh
Place: Texas, USA

Dear Editor,

Can you request the author of this article to clarify his statement: "However, we cannot ignore the Amrit and Khalsa aspect of Sikhism without clarification."

Is he trying to suggest that with "clarification", we can ignore Amrit and Khalsa? I would request the answer to be very short, brief, and to the point.

-- Rajinder Singh

from Jon Lomberg
Place: USA

Dear Preet Mohan,

I found the article informative and an accurate summary of this complex topic. I hope the art by me and Lynette helps to support the ideas you presented so clearly. And thank you for the very kind mention of my artwork at the end.

-- Jon Lomberg

from Sukhraj Singh Dhillon
Place: USA

Dear Editor,

Thanks for the interest. Reader is free to use different sentence if he is not comfortable with this sentence. The intent is clear that we put in proper perspective the concept of khalsa and khade di pahul: "The greatest contribution of the last living 10th Guru Nanak-- Guru Gobind Singh Ji-- is the creation of Khalsa, the family of pure ones, to which a Sikh may belong through receiving baptism or initiation (Amrit/khande di pahul). Therefore, every khalsa is a Sikh but every Sikh is not a khalsa unless he/she receives baptism." This statement happens to be supported by two well known historians Dr. H.W. McLeod and Dr. J.S. Grewal. Encourage those who are ready to take Khande di pahul to join the ranks of khalsa, but respect each other as equal sikhs.

This is my humble view as a seeker of truth. If reader has different concept, I have nothing but respect for his views.

With regards,

-- Dr Sukhraj Singh Dhillon

P.S. For more info on this and other aspects, reader may like to visit: http://acsagurdwara.org/sikhreview_article_drdln.html

from Baldev Singh
Place: USA

Dear Editor,

G. B. Singh’s in-depth and exhaustive analysis of ‘Christian heaven’ is an eye opener for me. The take home message from this article is that Jesus was trying to explain to his disciples that heaven is on earth and not somewhere else. The kingdom of God is within us.

I am disappointed in Reverend Zakveld’s response to this article. I wish he had explained his position in a rational manner. Instead, he insists that the prerequisite to understand ‘Christian heave’ is unquestionable faith in Jesus’ words. However, as pointed out by Singh, these are not the words of Jesus, these are words of his disciples, who claimed that Jesus spoke these words. This is why there are so many versions of the Bible. In other words, the Reverend is saying that the high way to ‘Christian heaven’ requires ‘blindfold driving’. ‘Blindfold driving’ may be safe in ‘Christian heaven’ but it is very dangerous and destructive on our planet earth. Human history is witness to the havoc caused by blind faith.

Nanakian philosophy (Guru Nanak’s teaching) rejects blind faith and insists on discerning intellect to understand any subject and in solving human problems. Use discerning intellect (akal) in the service of God and in practice of charity; Acquire wisdom through intelligent reading and earn respect by intelligent behavior. Nanak, this is the right way, others are futile. Aad Guru Granth Sahib, p 1245.

One who is endowed with discerning intellect is wealthy indeed.
Aad Gru Granth Sahib, p 1150.

I salute the enlightened being who enlightens others.
Aad Guru Granth Sahib, 295.

Guru Nanak summed up human problems beautifully and eloquently in a pithy verse. Suffering due to alienation from God, gnawing of poverty and tyranny of the ruler (AGGS p 1256).

I fully endorse G. B. Singh’s assertion that our efforts should be focussed on turning our troubled planet into paradise -- a place of peace. I do not mean the peace of the ‘mighty’ but genuine peace where all of God’s creatures live in a harmonious, synergetic and symbiotic relationship.

Nanak says, “A True God brings all together.”
AGGS, p 72.

Hey fellow, you are my brother as we all the progeny of one Father.
AGGS, p 611.

None is our foe, or stranger to us, getting along with all is our creed.
AGGS, M 5, p 1299.

O my Beloved, all claim partnership with You, as you do not look at any one as a stranger.
AGGS, M 5, p 97.

Recognize all human beings as one family.
Sawayae, Patshahi, 10.

Let me close with end line of Sikh congregational prayer.

May the glory of Nanak’s philosophy of Naam, which prays for the well of all ascend forever.

from Sukhraj Singh Dhillon
Place: USA

Dear Editor,

Regarding the statement, "However, we cannot ignore the Amrit and Khalsa aspect of Sikhism without clarification", a more appropriate reading would be, "However, we cannot ignore the Amrit and Khalsa aspect of Sikhism that needs clarification."

-- Dr Sukhraj Singh Dhillon

from Dalip Singh
Place: USA

Dear Editor,

Reference the article of Col GB Singh's discussion with Christian evangelist Rev. Tony Zekveld, published on your website. This discussion is merely confined to interpretation of the contents of the Bible. I have written books on the life of the revered Sikh Gurus, and on the depth of their teachings. The books referred to are, (1) Life of Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji; (2) Life of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji; (3) Life of Eight Guru Jots - 2nd - 9th Gurus, (4) Sabad Guru, Surat Dhun Chela; (5) Sikh Teachings in the words of the Gurus (6) Compilation of Aad Granth Ji (Translation and enlargement of late Prof Sahib Singh's book, Aad Birh Barai)- All in English.

Books 5 and 6 discuss Sikh teachings in depth. The findings that have been revealed are that none of the Sikh writers including late Prof Sahib Singh Ji could correctly translate Aad Granth Ji, as they failed to reach the Basic Concept of the Divine Teachings - lacked understanding of the correct interpretation of words, Guru, Satguru, Satgur Poora, Sabad (It does not mean Gurbani, but the Divine Jot abiding in all (Soul), which is verily God Himself abiding in all) - "Sabdai opjai Amrit Bani, Gurmukh aakh sunavaniya" - Majh M.3 p. 125 Aad Gr.)

I look forward to write to Rev. Tony Zekveld, and all other evangelists in USA, Canada, India and elsewhere to scientifically prove that there is no Heaven or Hell. Astpadi 21 of Sukhmani Sahib also tells us this. Before God's act of creation, there was nothing in existence, not even space; except that the Eternal Lord Himself was there in deep meditation. The Guru teaches,

"When He Himself fashioned the visible world of the creation, He
creates
the Material World of three Modes. Sin and virtue then began to be
spoken
of. Some were said to have been sent to hell, and some to paradise.
Worldly snares and entanglements of maya, egotism,
attachment, doubt and
loads of fear; pain and pleasure, honor and dishonor - these came
to be
described in various ways. He Himself creates and beholds His own
drama.
He winds up the drama, and then, O Nanak, He alone remains."\

In Jaap Sahib of Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji, more than 15 times it is repeated that the Infinite Formless God, is not confined to any one country or place, but is Omnipresent everywhere: "Nanastung Nirdaisai, Namustung Nirbhaisai." There is no hell or heaven, those who lead selfish egocentric life, they lead hellish life in being repeatedly reborn and meeting death, and suffer for their actions. Those of us who live with God in loving devotion, and obey His Commands, are honored here and hereafter, and merge back in God, whence we came. God is not confined to any place or form, since He is Formless, and His Light or Jot pervades all the creation in each creature, which is the source of life. To say that God is only in a particular place, and Heaven is His Abode, we then denigrate the Infinite All Pervading God to limitation which is irreligious.

The Bible tends to trap us with the lure of a seat in Paradise thereby making religion a trade which is shameful. They do not know the actual relationship of the Creator with the creatures. I have much more to add in this respect, and intend to write a book on the subject.

Thank you.

Dalip Singh

from GB Singh
Place: USA

Dear Prof. Muthu Mohan,

I read with interest “Guru Granth Sahib in the Context of Bhakti Traditions.” For the last number of years I have been critically looking into this issue and my skepticism has grown since. Here are some issues I am raising:

1. In the reference section of your article, you pointed 5 references that I am not sure date that far back.

2. If “Bhakti Movement (BM)” was a real historical phenomenon, then who started the movement and why? You stated that the BM, “Chronologically, researchers place them from the 5 c A.D to the 9 c A.D.” I am aware of other researchers who claim to have traced BM to 8th century CE or close to it. Other scholars have different opinions.

3. Historically speaking, who coined the term “Bhakti Movement’? In my preliminary scrutiny I found that it was the Christian missionaries who coined the term once they got the hold on the subcontinent in the 18th to 19th century CE. And in the process they propagandized about the New Testament as the most original document of “Bhakti Movement.” This move was meant to help in their endeavor of evangelization. Have you researched this part of the mystery?

-- GB Singh
USA

And, http://www.sikhspectrum.com/112004/postm.htm

from Baldev Singh
Place: USA

Dear Editor,

Both of Professor Muthu Mohan’s articles are excellent. I have read them with keen interest and it has enhanced my understanding of various schools of Indian philosophy. G. B. Singh has already drawn his attention to the coinage of the term ‘bhakti movement’. However, I would like to discuss with him the usage of the honorific ‘Sant’ for Namdev, Kabir, Ravidas and others whose thoughts are incorporated in the Aad Guru Granth Sahib.

In Aad Guru Granth Sahib sant, sadh and bhagat occur frequently and interchangeably. Their meaning is the same and in English it has been translated as a saint. In the Adi Granth compiled in 1604, the honorific bhagat is used for Namdev, Kabir, Ravidas and others, and their bani (composition) is called bhagat bani. Had they been known as sants at that time, Guru Arjan Dev would have used the honorific sant for them. Therefore, sant came to be associated with their names later on.

Recently, Professor Nirvikar Singh has pointed out that ‘Sant tradition’ is relatively a modern construction and not an understanding that was contemporary to the period of Guru Nanak. This term originated in the late 19th or early 20th century. Here is an abstract from his article.

“Was Guru Nanak a “Sant’? What does the term ‘Sant tradition’ means in this context? This paper surveys the state of academic responses to these questions. We make the case that the concept of ‘Sant tradition’ and the membership of Guru Nanak in that tradition are quite problematic. In doing so we argue that previous attempts to frame arguments on these issues in terms of ‘historical scholarship’ versus faith are flawed and sometimes ahistorical themselves.

“Instead, alternative answers emerge from within standard scholarly inquiry, depending on varying interpretations and combinations of fragmentary historical facts. We show how this process of interpretation and selection occurs particularly in W.H. McLeod’s writings on the subject. We also discuss the nature of the sources used by scholars, and the biases that may thereby be introduced.”[1]

In his response McLeod complains, “Why is he the main target in the article?” However, he acknowledges the fact that ‘Sant tradition’ label applied to Northern Indian bhakats (bhagats) such as Kabir and Ravidas did not emerge until the nineteenth century. He argues that the term is nevertheless useful to distinguish individuals such as these from Vaishnava sarguna bhakats. To the question ‘Was Guru Nanak a Sant?’ he gives his favorite answer ‘yes and no’, which he often does to defend his interpretation of Sikhism.[2]

It is noteworthy that he has not made any effort to distinguish Sikh Guru from other gurus. On the contrary he has made an unsuccessful attempt to link them to Nath yogis and Vaishnava bhakats through his ‘Sant tradition’. [3]

References

1 Singh, N. Guru Nanak and ‘Sants’: A Reappraisal, 2001, 8 (1), p 1-34.

2 Singh, N. Guru Nanak and ‘sants’: A Response to Professor McLeod. 2002, 9 (1), p 1-4.

3 McLeod, W. H. Guru Nanak and the Sikh Religion, Oxford University Press, 1996, p 156-161.

-- Baldev Singh

from G.B Singh
Place: USA

Dear Editor,

Professor Muthu Mohan’s A Postmodern Reading of Indian Philosophy is an excellent article. Even though it is difficult to understand--understandably it is a common fate of the subject when dealing with professional discussion of philosophy.

What has often been reported as “Hindu Philosophies” of Nyaya, Vaisheshika, Samkhya, Yoga, Purva Mimamsa, and Vedanta need to be re-evaluated. Are they really philosophies as the word is used in the Western sense? Or are they something else?

Within the Hindu terminology they are called Darshanas, which means “holy viewing.” When one reads the above six Darshanas critically they do not come across as philosophies. However, when read with “holy viewing” point of view, they do start to make sense.

For example, take the case of Patanjali’s Yogasutra. When it is read as “philosophy” it leaves you with utter confusion and you ask yourself: is it a philosophy? In my years of dealing with Yogasutra and the rest of others I have come to a conclusion that these works are not philosophies; they are ideologies (political and nonpolitical) designed to condition your mind. I would urge all interested readers to re-assess Jain and Buddhist scriptures and hundreds of odd Upanishads in the context of psychology and mind conditioning.

--GB Singh

from jetty Singh
Place: UK

Editors-- We would like to thank jetty Singh for his contribution to the success of SikhSpectrum.com since its inaugural issue in mid-June 2002. For the information of new our readers, jetty Singh has contributed a large selection of his poems to SikhSpectrum.com. There is something special in his style, which is best described by a letter we received from a reader who is the Manager Editor of another Literary Online Magazine. Commenting on jetty Singh’s tribute to the victims of 9/11 he wrote:

I have recently read your poems regarding 09/11 at SikhSpectrum.com. I love your style as it brings the emotions forward to the readers. There are many poems regarding 09/11 and as kind and heartfelt they maybe, most of them lack tone, imagery, voice and tend to use clichés. I found that yours had excellent tone and imagery without [the] use of clichés.

Here are the links to two of his poems. Others can be found in the Bibliography link under the categories Poetry and Tribute.

Tribute - Magnificent Seven
http://www.sikhspectrum.com/032003/seven_s.htm

Dedicated To American People And Their President
http://www.sikhspectrum.com/092002/poems.htm


Dear Preet Mohan,

Fateh

i have read yer article so far in the current issue of the magazine. i must congratulate ye for this excellent, well-researched and thought mulling article. Obviously a lot of hard work and analytical distillation has gone into this endeavor. SikhSpectrum.com is doing better and better, each time with leaps and bounds. Wahe Guru shall bless everyone involved, for all yer sincere and valuable contribution to educate and to break down self-created barriers.

Regards,

-- jetty Singh

from Baldev
Place: USA

Dear Editor,

I want to draw Professor Hardev Singh Virk’s attention to his rather literal interpretation of some of the verses in his article. Literal translation from one language into another often looses the real meaning. The translator must strive to come up with the proper meaning even if it is long or the essence of message may get lost. I believe that this is the major drawback of all English translations of Ad Guru Granth Sahib, and writings of casual Sikh writers and scholars when they translate grubani into the English language often reflect it. For the sake of brevity let me point out to Dr. Virk’s interpretation in beginning of the article.

God created air, from air came water
And from water world was created.
God spirit permeates all being.

Here, Guru Nanak is talking about ‘all life’ or ‘world of life’, not the world as ‘the entire creation’. We know scientifically that life first evolved in water and water is essential for the support of life. So water created ‘all life’ or ‘world of life’ conveys the proper meaning of the verse.

In another shabad on page 1289, Guru Nanak discusses the futility of debate about meat eating with a Brahmin priest for whom even the sight of flesh is a sin, what speak of eating it. In this shabd Guru Nanak first explains the importance of flesh in creation, nurturing, and the support of life and then points out that it is water that is the source of all life whether plant or animal. I have interpreted this entire shabad, in my article on the writings of Bhai Randhir Singh, which has been published in the current issue of SikhSpectrum.com.

-- Baldev Singh

from Hardev Singh Virk
Place: India

Dear Editor,

I perfectly agree with Dr. Baldev Singh that English translations of Gurbani have many distortions in them. I used the Sant Singh Khalsa version and it was a literal rendering of the Shabad.

Please convey my thanks to Sardar Baldev Singh.

-- Hardev Singh Virk

from Mandeep Singh Bajwa
Place: India

Editors -- Mr. Bajwa was asked to provide evidence to prove that these people are indeed not Sikhs. However, SikhSpectrum.com has not received any firm evidence from him yet. We have recommended that he contact the Regimental Office, a suggestion he has himself made in his email. Mr. Bajwa might find it inconceivable but it is not hard to believe that a Sikh was categorized as a Jat (as per some of the categories Bajwa has suggested) just to fit him into the regiment. In places where the Sikh population is small this sort of thing could have easily happened in a country like India where, in many ways, Sikhs are still categorized as Hindus.

For example when two Sikhs get married Indian official records show the marriage as a Hindu marriage. A researcher, say 80 years from now, looking into the "official marriage records" would be inclined to believe that in this particular case two Hindus (with Sikh names) got married although, in reality, it is not true. Unfortunately, in India record keeping is so poor that anybody can be classified as anything partly because people who are affected are mostly illiterate and would not know, if what is written on a form about them is the same as what was told to the person filling out the form, and in most instances their role is limited to putting their thumb impression on the form. It is not uncommon to read in the news how records get doctored all the time in India.

It may not come as a surprise to know that some Sikh were classified either as Hindu jat or something else, in places where Sikhs were in small numbers just to accommodate them into the armed forces. Otherwise what percentage would a few Sikhs make in that regiment – negligible (something like 0.001 or so). Would it make sense to use this number?

We have forwarded Mr. Bajwa’s email to the author who has compiled the list that was published online. We believe if Mr. Bajwa has better evidence to support his views (like Regimental Records etc. of these particular individuals) it would be a first step to find the truth. He may even benefit from visiting the villages to which these specific soldiers belonged and talking with elders might provide more information that may help in knowing the background of these soldiers.

Mr. Bajwa has stated that Sikhs don’t have the last name Bhandari. We would like to inform him that there are Sikhs with this last name and whether Kalyan Singh Bhandari was Sikh or not is something we will leave for Mr. Bajwa to figure out. Furthermore, in the case of Nihal Singh, son of Har Nath and Mam Kaur (a Sikh name), Mr. Bajwa is of the opinion that Nihal could not be a Sikh simply because the father’s name is Har Nath (and not Har Singh). We would like to inform Mr. Bajwa that there are many Sikhs who are not born into Sikh families and yet decided to embrace the faith. We see these examples everywhere both in India and the West where there are many converts to Sikhism. These people have Sikh names even though their parents are not Sikhs. This was true even in the early part of the 20th century.


Dear Editor,

There are 4 names of non-Sikhs on the list compiled by S.Bhupinder Singh Holland and the International Sikh Youth Federation. I'll discuss each of them in turn giving my detailed reasons for believing that they are not Sikhs.This is backed up by my 25 years of research and study of Indian military history.

· NIHAL SINGH, Lance Naik, 22936. 1st Bn. 6th Rajputana Rifles. 16th June 1944. Age 23. Son of Har Nath and Mam Kaur, of Jhamola, Jind, India. Plot 1. Row H. Grave 11.

While there could be Sikhs belonging to Jind State, the class composition of the 1st Bn, 6th Rajputana Rifles was

50% Hindu Jats
25% Hindu Rajputs
25% Punjabi Mussalmans
(Some Hindu Gujars and Ahirs were also recruited during WW 2 ). As you can see his father's name is Har Nath NOT Singh.

· GOPAL SINGH BISHT, Rifleman, 9489. 3rd Bn. 18th Royal Garhwal Rifles. 11th May 1944. Age 21. Son of Chimar Singh, of Kami, Garhwal, India. Row 1. Coll. grave 1-65.

This soldier is clearly a Hindu Garhwali Rajput judging from his name and the place he belongs to.Furthermore the class composition of the 18th Royal Garhwali Rifles was 100% Hindu Garhwalis (a few Hindu Dogra Rajputs and UP Brahmins were also recruited during WW 2)

KALYAN SINGH BHANDARI, Lance Naik, 5444. 3rd Bn. 18th Royal Garhwal Rifles. 11th May 1944. Age 33. Son of Kalian Singh and Indra, of Kandai, Garhwal, India; husband of Paruli, of Kandai. Row 1. Coll. grave 1-65

This soldier is also very clearly a Hindu Garhwali Brahmin.Again the same class composition.

· JATAN SINGH, Lance Daffadar, 6984. 2nd Royal Lancers, I.A.C.. 21st December 1943. Age 24. Son of Kushal Singh and Jaran Bai, of Chalkoi, Rajgarh (Bikaner), India. Sec. 18. Plot 1. Row D. Grave 2.

The class composition of the 2nd Royal Lancers during WW 2 was
33% Hindu Rajputs
33% Hindu Jats
33% Hindustani Mussalmans/Mussalman Rajputs (Ranghars)

Therefore there can be no question of any Sikh forming part of this Regiment. Secondly, the soldier's place of domicile proves that he was not a Sikh.

My intention in pointing out these errors is simply to correct the detail in the interest of historical accuracy. Its my firm belief that Indian troops who fought on the side of the Allies during both World Wars never got their due and the present generation are not even aware of their sacrifices or their contribution. Maybe all of us can join hands and do something about it.

-- Mandeep Singh Bajwa
Consulting Editor,
Centre for Indian Military History
www.indianmilitaryhistory.org

from Baldev Singh
Place: USA

Dear Editor,

The comparison of the philosophy of Spinoza and Sikhism by Jijo Panjikaran is an excellent article. I applaud the author for insightful presentation of Nanakian philosophy. I am wonder-struck by the congruity of the thoughts of Guru Nanak and philosopher Spinoza about God. Spinoza uses the term ‘substance’ for God.

‘By substance I understand that which is in itself and conceived through itself; in other words, that the conception of which does not need the conception of another thing from which it must be formed.’

It is unfortunate that Sikh writers / scholars follow the example of other religions and the writings of Europeans on Sikhism to describe God as ‘He’ without paying attention to the bani (compositions) of Aad Guru Granth Sahib.

Guru Nanak did not assign any specific name or gender to God. In Aad Guru Granth Sahib, most often, God is called as One, oh (That), eh (It), Creator, Almighty, Infinite, Ineffable and by numerous other Divine, attributes. In the Punjabi language both oh and eh are gender neutral. Both Hindu and Muslim names of God are also used. Additionally, God is called father, mother, lover, husband, brother and friend to make It (God) the center of family life in contrast to ascetic life as advocated by others who felt such living necessary for the realization of God.

The author has quoted the standard or most common interpretation or translation of the opening verse of Aad Guru Guru Granth found in English translations of Japu (Japji).

He is the supreme truth,
He, the creator,
Is without fear and without hatred,
He, the omnipresent,
Pervades the Universe,
He is not born,
Nor does He die to be born again,
Before time itself,
There was truth,
When the time began to run its course,
He was the truth.

from S.S. Dhillon
Place: USA

Dear Editor,

Since the author has referred to Khushwant Singh's strange interpretations and free spirit, here is an example of it. In his autobiography, Khushwant Singh while talking about kesh says:

"As children we were not encouraged to ask too many questions about religion. The last Guru had ordained that Sikhs must never cut hair on any part of their bodies, not eat Kosher (halaal) meat, smoke or consume tobacco in any form. And that was that.

"Men who clipped their beards or moustaches were automatically ostracized as patits (renegades). The observance of ritual and prayer were also laid down. If you recited the five prescribed prayers (nitneym) you were a good boy; if you did not, you were an urchin. Since I could recite my morning and evening prayers by rote and at times sang a shabad or two in the Gurdwara, I was my grandmother's favorite grandchild.

"Till I was fifteen I liked wearing my hair long. There was nothing effeminate about it. Ours was a macho creed of the Khalsa and our warrior Guru had ordained that long hair was sacred. When hair began to sprout on my face and genitals I began to question its sanctity. I used depilatory cream to remove my pubic hair and thought women without it and hair in their armpits, as portrayed in marble statuary, looked more fetching than those with bushy growths between their thighs in dirty picture-postcards.

"Thus the first dogmas I began to question were these external emblems of Sikh separateness. They appeared to me as superfluous as superfluous hair on the body; they had no spiritual content. I continued to retain the outward emblems of the Khalsa not because of any conviction but out of a wish to remain a part of the Khalsa fraternity. The sense of belonging gave me a sense of social security, as it does to this day."

-- Dr. S.S. Dhillon

from K.P. Singh
Place: USA

Dear Editor,

Our involvement in communities where there is smaller Sikh presence is a step in the right direction at this time in our nation's history and environment. May Sutguru continue to guide our energy and vision, and we go forward as partners in community building and not just people who follow an unfamiliar faith and culture with a distinct identity. We have the responsibility to dispel the unfortunate stereotypes and ignorance which inspires hostility, intolerance, and hate crimes.

As a distinct and relatively less-known faith community in the West, we have come a long way thanks to our tireless sevaks (volunteers) in the cyber and print media, individual efforts, and our American friends and interfaith colleagues who see the colorful cultural and spiritual introductions into the American cultural landscape as a good thing and new emerging renaissance of our times. There is much work ahead in the areas of acceptance and greater appreciation and the exercise of our sacred rights as Americans.

We too must learn and be informed about other cultures and faiths that surround us and take the first steps towards paving our shared passages with prayer and friendship at many levels. In Indiana we look with admiration and pride at all that the larger Sikh communities in Western countries are doing toward such a spirit. We thank and congratulate them for their enlightened efforts.

With regards and blessings to you and others who continue to expand spiritual understanding through Sikhspectrum.com and in other creative ways.

Best wishes,

-- Kanwal Prakash "KP" Singh

from G.B. Singh
Place: USA

Dear Ms. Damanpal Kaur Anand,

I read the sad tale of your tragedy on the www.Sikhspectrum.com. My heart goes out to you and your family for facing the untimely despicable murder of your husband in a foreign land. May Waheguru give you the courage to face the difficult times and gather the strength to move ahead.

Any help that I can furnish you please feel free to reach me.

Sincerely,

-- GB Singh

from Jo Ringshein
Place: USA

Dear Colonel Singh,

This evening I read the article "Conversing with Reverend Tony Zekveld" on www.sikhspectrum.com. The conversations with Rev. Zekveld will, no doubt, be quite interesting. In my experience I find that the more I learn about other cultures and their religions the better I understand my own. In your article you mentioned, "Sikhs invariably don't write on other religions in a critical fashion." With the impact that religious fundamentalists have had at the start of the 21st century perhaps it is time for change. With the growth of fundamentalist Christianity in the United States and abroad it is time to examine the religion in a far more critical light then simply as contrast and comparison between different religions. It has been two thousand years since Christianity began. Why not consider examining core Christian beliefs to determine what, if anything, it has to offer the world of today.

While discussions of heaven and the soul are educational they will never address the information that the average Indian, African, Asian or Russian need to know in order to properly assess the onslaught of antiquated Christian beliefs that are being spread by the missionaries. History has shown that people are moved by stories of gods who suffer and die for mankind. The emotional appeal of the Christian Jesus, and Christianity's idealistic moral ideals, are a powerful force in a world filled with poverty, violence, and suffering. The question that must be answered by the person being proselytized is: "Is Christianity valid?" I believe that anyone with a modest knowledge of science, and a bible, can answer that question with a resounding, "No!"

The topics critical to evaluating the validity of Christianity are surprisingly few. The key to understanding Christianity is realizing that it is a religion based on divine revelation. Christianity (and Judaism) claims that the creator of the universe directly revealed himself to mankind through his prophets as recorded in divinely written words. While one cannot prove that god does or does not exist, it is an amazingly simple task to determine if the bible was divinely written and is inerrant. If significant errors do exist then how can its message be trusted? Sadly for Christianity, the abundant errors contained within the bible are in theologically critical areas. The concept that Jesus came to die for mankind's sins cannot be taken seriously unless Adam and Eve fell from grace through sin. This requires the story of god’s creation to be history, not myth. If the creation story itself is found to be false, then Jesus died in vain. Pope John Paul II states in The Catechism of the Catholic Church that, “The Church, which has the mind of Christ, knows very well that we cannot tamper with the revelation of original sin without undermining the mystery of Christ.”

Another item to focus upon is Jesus himself. Did the authors of the gospels write an accurate account of his life? If their stories about Jesus are not historical how can anyone know the real Jesus? Did Jesus declare himself to be divine? The concept of the Trinity is a blasphemy to Judaism, which holds that there is but one god. Jesus predicted that the end of the world, and the establishment of the Kingdom of God on earth, would occur within the lifetime of some of his listeners. Why did this fail to materialize? If Jesus was a god how could he have been wrong?

Ignored by modern Christians is the fact that there were more versions of Christianity in the first one hundred years after the death of Jesus than there are now. A large percent of Christians were Gnostic, some of who called the literal belief of the resurrection of Jesus the “faith of fools.” The earliest Christians were practicing Jews and denied salvation to pagans who did not follow Judaic law. Which Judaic sect accurately represented the teachings of Jesus? Or did a disciple who never met Jesus create the one true religion?

Thank you for permitting me a venue for expressing some of my own thoughts. I hope that there may be something of value in them. I book marked the web site and will check to see how things unfold. I am sure it will be most interesting!

Sincerely,

-- Jo Ringshein

from Raman Pabreja
Place: Dubai, UAE

The article mentions late A.S. Pabreja. He was my tayaji (uncle). I really felt good reading his name.

Thanks

from Harbans Singh Noor
Place: USA

Excellent article.

You have whetted my appetite. On my next visit to the library I will look for the book. I hope to enjoy it as much as you did.

from Gurbhajan Singh
Place: CA, USA

Great Work! Are you planning on writing a book or have you already written one? The need of the hour is to critically examine the scriptures from an honest point of view. Thanks for the wonderful work.

from A. Singh Jangi
Place: USA

I can’t more profoundly agree with this article. I am a Sikh, granted not an Amritdhari member of the Khalsa but I believe it is a decision everyone needs to make for him or herself; it is a sacred covenant which not everyone is ready for. The point of all this is, I entirely agree that many Sikhs (many of whom gladly show all the worldly aspects of Sikhism) do not explore this beautiful faith for themselves, and fail to realize the catholicity of our faith in its beliefs in religion, ethnicity, and gender. The Granth Sahib and the janamsakhis tell us that the gurus repeatedly speak of translating the Granth to all the languages necessary, and to those who say otherwise I would simply direct them to the original copies of the Holy books at the Harimandir Sahib which are written in Arabic, Farsi, Brijj, Punjabi, Marathi, Sanskrit, Hindi and some archaic languages long forgotten in India.

Many of Sikhism's greatest scholars like Gurbachan Singh Talib (who was a convert) translated the holy text into English with the sponsorship of Punjab University and the Akal Thakht. I myself, though a native Punjabi speaker, have grown up in a mostly Hindi / English environment which means that it takes me multiple readings to understand something in the original Punjabi whereas I can get the meaning much faster in English. To have a name like Harpreet Kaur or Gurvinder Singh (random names, sorry if these are the reader's names) and wearing a turban does not make you a Sikh. Understanding the meaning and the words of the Granth and of all Holy books and bringing yourself in the way of God is what makes a man and a woman a Sikh, whether you are Harry, Ram or Abdul. Anything that the Sikh community does to cause impediments to salvation of others should amount to heresy.

from Ciaran Byrne
Place: London, England

I just read your article on the Sikhs in WWI. Very interesting indeed and you are to be congratulated. One thing that did interest me. You stated that the photo of the supposed 129th Baluchis that the Imperial War Museum owns is wrong. Thank you for letting me know this as I am very interested in the 5th Royal Irish Lancers, and it was the 129th Baluchis who relieved them at the end of October 1914. This picture is touted in numerous publication as being the 129th Baluchis.

from Baldev Singh
Place: USA

Dear Editor,

A. Singh Jangi in his commentary (www.sikhspectrum.com/052003/yogi_k.htm) says that there are holy books at the Harimandir Sahib, which are written in Arabic, Farsi, Brijj, Punjabi, Marathi, Sanskrit, Hindi and some archaic languages long forgotten in India. What are these holy books about? Would Mr. Jangi throw some light on them?

Further on he says many of Sikhism's greatest scholars like Gurbachan Singh Talib (who was a convert) translated the holy text into English with the sponsorship of Punjab University and the Akal Thakht. Has the author studied this literal translation by Talib? Recently, Doris R. Jakobsh has published her PhD thesis, Relocating Gender in Sikh History: Transformation, Meaning and Identity. Using Talib's translation she claims that Sikh Gurus were anti-women. Would Mr. Jangi and others who are promoting such translations and loading them on the Internet like to respond to her thesis?