Columnists
Read Our Lips
Hum Hindu Naheen Hain! - We Are Not Hindus!
by I.J. SINGH
The Internet is abuzz these days and Sikhs worldwide are seriously upset.
A luminary of the right wing Hindu movement in India has written an article. At any time, many articles get published that carry significant errors of both omission and commission but this is has both, and is also indecorous in the extreme. It weaves its inaccuracies in a pattern that is meant to challenge and goad Sikhs to respond in kind - preferably not in a sensible, considered and mature fashion.
Of course, it has the Sikhs boiling mad. But a considered response still waits.
The author, Tewari, wrote it after a visit to The Golden Temple at Amritsar. I have seen parts of his essay, and it consists of nothing more than a series of impolite and unwelcome diatribe and demands.
He tells us that many names of the Hindu pantheon occur in the Guru Granth ... and they do. The count runs to several thousand - hence, he claims that Guru Granth is nothing more than a derivation of the Vedas and restatement of the Hindu religion.
He, then, goes on to rename the premier Sikh place of worship, the Harmandar Sahib (Golden Temple) at Amritsar as a shivalya - a Hindu temple that is dedicated to the Hindu god Shiva.
He clearly does not know that the Guru Granth, in addition to the writings of the Gurus, has those in it compositions of many saints and bards who would not ever sit and break bread together, much less be caught on the adjoining pages of the same holy book in hindudom - as they are seen in the Guru Granth.
You see, some of these saints were so-called 'low-caste' Hindus and others were Muslim. In traditional Hindu belief, neither has an acceptable place or right to pursue a religious calling or read the scriptures. I add here that neitrher do Hindu women.
He goes on to demand that Sikhs purge the Guru Granth of these 'unacceptable' writings, especially those by Muslims. He also wants the Sikhs to change the menu of the Sikh community meal (langar) that is a most attractive part of every Sikh service around the globe. (Sikhs cook with onions and garlic which are anathema to the traditionally prepared Hindu religious meal.)
His is a virtual mishmash of fulminations and demands covering the gamut from our fundamental beliefs to our widespread practices. I am not even going to classify them into what is trivial and what is nonsense. To my mind that would be an inappropriate and mindless exercise. Such inferences as he has advanced need to be immediately relegated to the nearest trash bin.
Why? For answer to that let's take a longer look at some historical nuggets.
Tewari's issues are posited not for serious dialog; they are raised to get our goat. We need not - indeed must not - fall into the trap. It would not be productive.
In the last century, Swami Dayanand, a Hindu religious reformist, wrote his magnum opus, Satyarth Prakash that has become the Bible of the Hindu right wing that wants to reinvent the rich multifaith Indian culture as Hindutva - a new society based on the Hindu religion and culture. Satyarth Prakash also has passages attacking the integrity, character and teachings of the major non-Hindu prophets of other religions - including Jesus, Mohammed and Guru Nanak.
The book continues to enjoy widely distributed reruns amongst the right wing Hindus. Despite all attempts to inform the publishers, the insulting passages against other religions remain.
In fact such attempts to deny Sikhs an independent place in the sun are even older - they are largely, if not entirely, the initiatives of Hindu thinkers and writers since the times of the Gurus.
I find it intriguing that there has been a serious attempt in history that continues to this day by the larger Hindu society around us in India to claim Sikhi as an off shoot of Hinduism. This tells me that there must be much in Sikh teaching that Hindus admire so much that they wish to own it without giving up the label of Hindu.
I remind you that no one seeks identity and commonality with someone that is not admired. Seriously, I am flattered by this except that I wish to reject the stultifying embrace - a boa constrictor's love it would be - simply because it infringes on my right to define myself as I wish to - with warts and all.
I know well that at the periphery of any religion, where a movement comes into contact and overlaps with the religions of its neighbors, mixed practices arise. Nevertheless, such admixture does not mean that the two intertwined traditions are not separate and independent identities. If one wants to catalogue the ways that cultural practices of Hindus and Sikhs overlap, Harjot Oberoi's "Destructuring Religious Boundaries" would be a good read.
But attempts to push such a mixture as proof of commonality of religious doctrine have existed from the times of the Gurus half a millennium ago. People fail to see that the Gurus taught largely in the languages and cultures of India. The context of time and culture cannot be ignored. Hence, the metaphorical references to Hindu mythology and practices. After all most converts came from the caste-ridden Hindu society.
Our critics fail to see that there are copious references to both the Hindu and Muslim pantheon in the Guru Granth. Ram, for example occurs reverently as the name of God a myriad times; but the historical Ram, too, is mentioned and then he is summarily dismissed. In Hindu belief and practice, there is no distinction between the two Rams and the two are entirely conflated.
Our Hindu critics also fail to see that Islamic names of God - Allah, Rahim, etc, too, occur repeatedly. Had there been easy access to Judeo-Christian literature, I am sure some would have reference, a place or commentary in the Guru Granth.
The Hindu way of life rests on the centrality of the Brahmin, Caste system, the Codification of Hindu practice by Manu, and the place of the 'Mother' Cow as the great nurturer. These fundamentals lie rejected by the Founders of Sikhism.
As an aside, clearly, the Old Testament is at the root of Christianity and Islam. But to now on this basis to deny the independent existence of either or to label Christians and Muslims as Jews (Reformed?) would be asinine, at best. They have recognizable ties to Judaism that are rooted in history, tradition and teaching, but they are now independent realities.
Similarly, all Indic religions have overlapping practices. It is the denial of their independence and growth that is galling.
Hindu thought has always been unaccepting of the growth of such independent movements. Witness the fact that Buddhism that originated in India now has only a marginal existence in the land of its birth, even though it enjoys a growing popularity and acceptance outside India. It was decimated in India by the muscular anti-Buddhist policies of Hindu zealots.
India became independent only in 1947. For the first time in almost a millennium, the majority religion - Hinduism - was able to flex its muscle. Look at its first act: In the Constitution of the new nation, Sikhs, Buddhists and Jains are lumped together for legal purposes under the rubric of Hindus. Perhaps it saves a few drops of ink and a few lines of print, but their independent existence is denied even on paper.
The history of the struggle for Punjabi speaking linguistic state is a fascinating chapter in the Sikh struggle for an equal place at the table in India. I see the events of 1984 as a logical but tragic chapter in the same saga.
Sikhi is now and has been from its inception under siege. As long as Sikhs keep their independent identity and treasure the unique message of Guru Granth, they will thrive.
Circling the wagons - as a clarion call - will not do. We need to be both clearheaded and resolute; just one attribute of the two will not be sufficient.
Yet, Sikhism teaches us to accept and respect the separate identity of the Hindu way of life, and similarly respect the vision of other faiths. It is the same acceptance that we expect in return - no more and no less.
We all have the right to write comparative papers on our religion and the religion of our neighbors. But to deny them their independence is a funny way to win friends.
But the Hindu view has been consistently negative. In the early 20th century, the renowned Sikh scholar, Bhai Kahn Singh (Nabha), had to respond with a booklet titled "Hum Hindu Nahin" (We Are Not Hindus).
It is not our business to tell Hindus, Muslims, Christians, Buddhists or Jews, etc. how to define the requirements of their respective faiths. Why, then, should a Hindu want to tell us how to reshape ours?
And this is not the first time that some Hindu has stuck his nose where it does not belong. Between Dayanand and now Tewari, and even before these two, there were many, many more who tried to finish and destroy the Sikhs as an independent people - from Nadir Shah and Ahmad Shah Abdali, Jehangir, Aurungzeb to the petty Hindu Hill Rajas in the eighteenth century and Indira Gandhi in the twentieth. Some even thought they had achieved their goal and there were no more Sikhs.
Yet here we are today.
And I assure you, my readers, that the pattern and attacks will continue - so stay cool, and act but in sehaj, laced with a dollop of humour.
To the deniers of a place to Sikhs and Sikhi, I would say: Remember - your freedom of expression ends where my nose begins!
February 2, 2010
Conversation about this article
1: K. Singh (Boston, MA, U.S.A.), February 02, 2010, 12:37 PM.
Where can one find this rant by Tewari? Is it online?
2: Harleen Kaur (New Delhi, India), February 02, 2010, 1:25 PM.
Here, Mister, read MY lips: We were never Hindus. We aren't Hindus now. We will never be Hindus. We left Hinduism behind five centuries ago ... for ever. We WILL NOT slide back into the ditch to be with you any more. We respect your right to practice YOUR faith the way YOU want to, but don't make the mistake of taking our defence of your (and everybody else's) rights as a subscription into or endorsement of your beliefs and practices. R-E-A-D O-U-R L-I-P-S - Buddy, it'll save you a lot of time to get into other mischiefs.
3: K. Kaur (Canada), February 02, 2010, 2:27 PM.
For all those Sikhs, especially the younger generation, who were or are having a hard time understanding these attacks on Sikhism and Sikhs in India please read: "Percussions of History: The Sikh Revolution" & "In the Caravan of Revolution" by Jagjit Singh. They provide excellent insight into the differences between Hinduism and Sikhism. Once I had read them, I began to understand the restrictive and discriminatory nature which is fundamental to Hinduism and its need to control and dominate the minds and lives of people, compared to Sikhism which was designed to empower all sections of society, and give them the voice and strength to stand up for their rights as well as the rights of others. You will see that Sikhism is the antithesis of Hinduism and why it seems as such a threat in the minds of Hindus. If allowed to spread, Sikhism has the potential to liberate not only those who embrace it but the rest of India as well and this is not what the 'powers that be' want to happen. It all boils down to power, dominance and control!
4: Amardeep (U.S.A.), February 02, 2010, 2:37 PM.
As they say, no one kicks a dead dog. We should conduct consensus/ survey of Sikhs, asking them the question, are you Hindus? Otherwise it is a dictatorship, and violation of basic human rights. What a wastage of life, if your life is dedicated to spreading hatred and hate crimes?
5: Tejwant Singh (Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S.A.), February 02, 2010, 3:16 PM.
K. Singh: Here it is - http://www.sanghparivar.org/forum/harimandir-sahib-golden-temple-the-holy-city-of-amritsar
6: Tejwant Singh (Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S.A.), February 02, 2010, 3:38 PM.
One wonders why the honchos at the Akal Takht, S.G.P.C. and the Badals are silent about this!
7: Gurjender Singh (Maryland, U.S.A.), February 02, 2010, 10:33 PM.
Every Sikh leader in the Punjab Government in India and the S.G.P.C. does not care about being labelled a Hindu. If they protest, they are afraid of losing votes and their elected positions. Their Sikh employees are silent, because they cannot speak against their Government, otherwise they will lose their jobs. The Indian constitution has labelled us, over our vociferous protests, as Hindus since 1952. No Sikh leader, either in the centre or at the state level, raises this issue. Please wake-up, Even our marriage and birth certificates clearly categorizes us as Hindu. We are are just watching and ignoring the reality of a white-wash.
8: H. Singh (San Diego, California, U.S.A.), February 03, 2010, 1:56 AM.
I would like the author to explain what is it that attracts the Hindus to admire and want to absorb Sikhi within their fold, if in fact the Sikh Gurus rejected the central tenets of Hinduism. One can't be a fool and a boa constrictor at the same time in this situation ... or can they?
9: I.J. Singh (New York, U.S.A.), February 03, 2010, 8:45 AM.
H.Singh ji, things are not always so black and white as logic tells us. Love and hate, being two sides of the same coin, often co-exist. Hence the idea of sibling rivalry. The two - Sikhism and Hinduism have coexisted largely in the same space and culture. This reminds us of all the Punjabi Hindus who (used to) frequent gurdwaras who have said to me that the only religion of Punjab is Sikhi but the culture of Punbjab - nay of Northwest India - is Hindu. Sometimes I see strains of this idea in Sirdar Kapur Singh as well. I have to add that I reject such formulations entirely. And these are the same Hindus that rejected Punjabi as their mother tongue, even when they could speak no other language. The Hindus of Punjab do carry some very mixed attitudes about Sikhs and their religion - of admiration and a lot of envy, jealousy and denial at the same time. And they have tried throughout the existence of Sikhism a mixture of two attitudes - reject it entirely or insist that it is but a sect of Hinduism. Many Sikhs show a similar confusion. On the other hand, Hindus are not clamouring to include the out-castes into their fold because there is no admiration or envy there at all, only rejection.
10: Jodh Arora (Jericho, New York, U.S.A.), February 03, 2010, 11:54 AM.
I am glad you quoted Dayanand but the effect of his preachings did hurt Sikhs tremendously. As we have seen in Punjab since 1880 that many Sikhs converted one way or the other to Hindus. And in my times I had seen enough of troubles hurting Sikhs in Punjab. The thirteen districts left in Punjab were then trifurcated. How those Aryasamajis - followers of Dayanand - tried to kill Punjabi and convert many Sikhs, like Chiranjeev Singh, a Sikh look-alike but a Hindu at the core. My fear today is that the Sikhs living outside Punjab are their targets. Since there is a lot of illiteracy in India, they can easily become their victims. Likewise, they are assisted by the M.P.s Sidhu and S.S. Ahluwalia. Sidhu wore a dhoti, janeu and tikka when he attended a havan. You know it well that the Badals too will want us all to be quiet.
11: Tejwant Singh (Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S.A.), February 03, 2010, 12:17 PM.
This piece of hatred should be rebutted point by point in the national media. This hate-monger is doing nothing but drumming up the feelings of many ignorant people. There is a tinge of jealousy and envy in the warning in his essay where he states that their sheer numbers can mob us down. The author is also a hindu pundit who refused to take langar because it contained garlic and onions but relished the kheer made out of "holy bufflao" milk. There appears to be a more sinister side to his provocation which is not necessarily directed towards the Sikhs, because his claims are all bogus and lack depth, deep knowledge and the spiritual significance of the Guru Granth. It is all about money. Hindus built a temple exactly to replicate the Harmandar Sahib in Amritsar ... and, surprise, which no one visits! The visits of the Queen of England and the more recent trip by the Prime Minister of Canada to Harmandar Sahib proves that. Both of them refused to visit the mandir despite the urging and fierce campaign by the well known Hindus both in India and living in the U.K. and Canada. The top hindu temples do not get as much donation from their devotees as the Sikh gurdwaras do. Many Hindus visit Darbaar Sahib, Bangla Sahib and other gurdwaras across India and of course devotion breeds a softer heart which makes one donate money and other things to the places where one finds true solace. So, this rant by the pundit, no matter how ineffective it may sound or turn out to be, is mainly directed towards the Hindus to create a wedge among those who visit the gurdwaras. He wants their money for the mandirs. The rest of his rhetoric does not affect the Sikhs because we know that his bark has no bite.
12: Gurjender Singh (Maryland, U.S.A.), February 03, 2010, 2:38 PM.
After reading the comments, I am writing again to say to all readers: please keep in mind that what is right or fair or wrong do not count any more. What is happening around us and what is in written history and movies which are used by masses, counts more. One can talk and discuss views at sikhchic.com but the reality for Sikhs is completely different outside the gurdwaras. No one will read our lips unless until this is recognized in history books and the Indian constitution. God bless us.
13: Harmohan Singh (Srinagar, Kashmir), February 05, 2010, 5:09 AM.
Hum hindu naheen! There can't be two opinions about it. The time has come for Sikhs to stand up and say in one voice "WE ARE NOT HINDUS" if we want to maintain our identity. I would suggest every body to read the book "Hum Hindu Nahi Hain" by Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha.
14: Gurmukh Singh (London , United Kingdom), February 06, 2010, 6:01 PM.
As usual, Dr I.J. Singh has dealt most methodically with the issue referred to by, amongst others, S. Sewa Singh Mandla of the House of Lords 1983, Mandla v Lee, fame. In that case too it was a question of distinct Sikh theo-national (quomi) identity. The case is a milestone legal decision, which safeguards theo-social identities of distinct communities. The diagnosis of the undercurrent in Hindu-Sikh love-hate relationship is spot on and the guidance for the correct Sikh approach to such provocations clear. Truly, IJ's pen is a community resource!
15: Singh (U.S.A.), February 06, 2010, 6:28 PM.
Where can we get a copy of "Hum Hindu Naheen Hain" by Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha. Is it available online? [Editor: Try the 'Sacha Sauda' bookstore - phone # 1.905.459.8351 - Brampton, Ontario, Canada.]
16: Tejwant Singh (Las Vegas, Nevada, U.S.A.), February 07, 2010, 2:15 PM.
You can also try 'Nanak Parchar Sabha' in Los Angeles - Telephone # 1.213.624.2242. Ask for Gurdip Singh Malik.