Sir:
My “Concerns over BC Sikh Studies Chair” (WSN: 6/29/90) elicited quite educational responses from your readers: Dr.Jasbir Singh Mann (WSN: 7/13/90) kept the main topic in focus, for a while, and made strong and valid arguments against multidisciplinary university’s ability to teach Sikhism, and the “inappropriateness” of Sikh Studies Chairs. He was, however, quite sensational at my expense in claiming “Sukhbir Singh argues that Gurbani not be used in Sikh Studies”. Dr. Piara Singh (WSN: 7/20/90) was more forgiving to my objection “why drag Gurus Nanak and Granth Sahib in every argument”. Ignoring the hyperbole and liberal poetic license for this uncalled for charge, I defend my thesis:
“Sikh Studies Chairs: Sikh disappointment with Dr. Harjot Oberai does not disprove the utility of Sikh Studies Chairs. It does, however, exhort the Sikhs to be vigilant, and to devise mechanisms which balance their interests and the desirability of independence of an educational institution. Such programs enable the Sikhs to “buy into” established facilities. Also more than Just the Sikhs are bound to be exposed to Sikhism.
Center for higher religious studies is a noble ideal, a viable choice, and a good long term project. Here the operating assumption seems to be designed to discourage the curious: “Sikhism is the greatest, take my work for it”. “But it is delicate and fragile, and non-Sikhs are unable to appreciate its subtleties”. “It should be measured by the standards, methods, and scales designed and approved by the Sikhs only”. Unfortunately, presently this demand overlaps the course orchestrated by the current and former employees of Indian Institutions well known _hotbeds of “Hindu Sikh bhai pakhand”. Besides, the proposal is a pure blue sky, and application of the classic delaying tactic: “Na nau man tail ho ga, na radha nache gi”! One wonders if it is not a ruse to derail efforts at promotion of Sikh causes through anything other than Indian approved mouthpieces!
Sikh/Punjabi Universities devoted exclusively to the Sikh issues are no guarantee of protection of Sikh interests either: For instance, in spite of a high concentration of Sikh schools and colleges in Delhi, the Delhi Sikhs have disassociated themselves from the interests of Sikh Quom, and hastened to award Saropa to Rajiv Gandhi! The much vaunted “Sikh/Punjabi” universities in Punjab shelter sworn enemies of the Sikhs who put out the most vile propaganda against the Sikhs! Where are their Sikh scholars to defend the Sikh doctrines?
Tapping the Gurbani source: The Gurus propounded on a wide variety of subjects, and Guru Granth Sahib is a basic source of Sikh beliefs and practices. The Granth Sahib contains abundant quotations which explicitly or implicitly support and reinforce doctrinal arguments or provide interpretive guidance. Particularly, Sikhism is a whole way of life, and a clear cut dividing line between politics and religion is nonexistent. It is a misuse of Gurbani, in my opinion, to bring weight in favor of the religiosity of the proponent, and to confound the opponent. Gurbani when used in debate, should be adequately integrated with the sequence and flow of thought, and lead to logical conclusions. A fair debate should resolve issues: it should use any and every chance to educate and win friends, and not to downgrade the curious and friendly.
Invocation of Gurus in a debate: Yes, I do not advocate the indiscriminate invocation of the authority of the Gurus in every argument. My reasons: Many a times Gurbani is quoted to establish the credentials of a defender of the faith and to project the opponent as a “nonbeliever”. Many use it to dazzle the audience with their “mastery” of the subject especially when they run short of ideas or words. They sidetrack the audience into devotional fervor, and follow with a long litany of matters to “get it off their system”. They charge their opponent with “being wrong”, who “fails to understand”, “has not quoted a single line of Gurbani”, and “has not studied the Granth Sahib”. Our heroes then go on to include an ala Doabia translation, and conclude with that gem “answer is very clear”. They don’t hazard any relevance of their lecture to the argument at hand. How frustrating can be a Math professor’s declaration; “LHS equals RHS: obviously, hypothesis is proved”. It may be obvious to the professor, but is that true for the students?
Case in point: Dr. Piara Singh cited two Gurbani quotations in support of the argument “Sikh traditions flow out of direct and deliberate innovations, intervention and teachings of Gurus and Granth Sahib”. His quotations were beautiful, and made the letter very impressive: but how did they prove his argument: The first quotation (Awal Allah Noor Upayaa) is by Bhagat Kabir, and the second (Manas ki jaat sabaai ekai pehchanbo) is not in Adi Granth: surely, it is from Dasam Granth (page 19)!
Dr. Sukhbir Singh Indianapolis, IN
Article extracted from this publication >> August 24, 1990
