By Dr. Darshan Singh
Professor & Chairman
Dept of Guru Nanak Studies
Panjab.University,, Chandigarh
(There has all along been a concerted attempt by the Hindus to discredit the Sikh religion as a mere sect of Hinduism, Recently, there have been articles in the Indian press in line with this government sponsored propaganda. This article, which WSN will publish over the next few weeks, demolishes the latest attack on the Sikh religion.)
I have gone through the “Sikhism” seeds of self-alienation and “Hindu roots of Sikhism” parts one and two, by Shri Ram Swarup, published in Indian Express, dated Feb.6 and April 24-25,1991. It makes an interesting reading. But, I fail to understand -the motive of these two articles. Main and the only thesis of the writer seems to be that Sikhism is not a religion, a separate and an independent religion and “in fact, the Sikh Gurus were Vaishnavist” thereby proving that maximum it is a sect like many other sects in the body of Hinduism. I do not understand that this is really a subject to spend so much time and energy. Else, does he want to prove that Sikhs can live with Hindus only if they accept this thesis? He himself is aware of the fact and he has quoted M.K.Gandhi also that Sikhs detest it. In the modem time even a child in a particular family is not prepared to accept the cohesive attitude even of his parents. But what to do about Shri Ram Swarup and people like him who insist upon reminding the Sikhs that they must declare themselves as Hindus. Is it not aggression? This amount to fanaticism resulting in the arrogance of being a member of the majority group.
Hindu is from word Sindhu. The people who were living on the other side of the river Sindh were called Sindhu by the people of Persia. Persian “S” changes itself into “H” of Indian language. Thus Sindhu of Persian became Hindu in our language. In this way, Hindu is one who lives across river Sindhu. Thus, Hindu is neither a religion nor a way of life, but a person. Moreover this is a term given by aliens and it was not chosen by those who were/are so-called. But, since the second half of the 19th century, under the name of Hindu renaissance, an attempt is being made to bring everyone in India under the umbrella of Hinduism, The fraudulent slogan of unity in diversity and vice-versa is also being promoted in this context.
India, since ages, is a land inhibited by people of number of faiths known as Sampradayas that is sects. Each of them holds a diametrical point of view, Some of them are believers, some are non-believers and some are silent about the existence of God, Someone is a god for someone, whereas same is a demon for the other sect. Because of many socio/political reasons no sect could develop itself into a religion in the sense of Christianity, Islam and Sikhism. The Sanskrit word Dharma is, therefore, not synonymous with religion.
In my view, only a group of people believing in, one God, one religious text, one central place of pilgrimage, and one and same ideology i.e. a uniform way of life or a culture, can call themselves as members of the same religion, Frankly speaking, neither the entire gamut of Hinduism (the word being used in the prevalent sense) nor anyone of its sects fulfils these conditions. Sikhism fulfils them all.
To begin with I am quoting the same four authors, which Shri Ram Swarup has quoted, to question his claim that Hinduism and Sikhism are indistinguishable.
George Forster’s account (1787 A.D.) calls Sikhism ‘a new system of religion’, According to him ‘the tenets of Nanock (Nanak) forbid the worship of images’ and *(Guru) Grunth is the only typical object which the Sicques (Sikhs) have admitted into their places of worship’ (p.293). Forster, quite categorically, asserts that Sikh religion was ‘designed to destroy that fabric of ceremony and form, which the Hindus are now taught to consider as the essential principle of their religion’ (p.308).
It is interesting to note that even Major James Browne’s narrative (1788 A.D.), in spite of owing its origin to non-Sikh resources (He confesses to have borrowed the account from two Hindu writers) bears enough testimony to the fact that the religion of Guru Nanak is markedly different from that of Hinduism, Speaking of Sikh Amrik ceremony he says that it is ‘designed to signify that every distinction is abolished, except that of being a Sick (Sikh), even a Mussalman may become a Sikh on these conditions’.
J.D.Cunningham invited the wrath of his British masters for projecting the Sikhs as a singular nation, For doing so he was removed from the coveted political post and stunned by the blow, died of a broken heart. He is emphatic in declaring that *in religious faith and worldly aspirations, they (the Sikhs) are wholly different from Indians, and they are bound together by a community of inward sentiment and of outward object unknown elsewhere’ (pp.75-76).
Col. Steinbach’s work, suffers from numerous factual mistakes, some of them as ridiculous as calling Guru Ram Dass, the son of the third Guru Amardass, besides calling the first Guru ‘Nanak Shah, the son of a salt merchant’, The outward distinctness of the Sikh people deeply influenced him to the extent that he refers to the Punjab as ‘the country of the Sikhs’. Such pertinent observations of early European writers have been over-looked by the ‘learned” scholar, who is out to prove that the Sikhs do not lie outside and the pale of Hinduism,
Much before the advent of these European writers of Sikh history, the faith of Guru Nanak was adjudged distinct by dispassionate non-Sikh observers. Qazi Nur Mohammad,(1756A.D,); who was a camp follower of the legendary Ahmad Shah Abdali, an enemy of the Sikhs, during one of the latter’s invasions into India, witnessed the Sikhs from close quarters. He records, in quite acerbic language that ‘the Sikh’s religion and its practices originate from the teachings of Nanak. These dogs (the Sikhs) are not Hindus by religion persuasion, These evil-doers have a way of life entirely different (Jangnamah)’,
In my view western writers did a commendable work but both, far and against the issue, are not dependable because they have not based their study on the real and primary source i.e. Gurbani, Therefore, there are a number of self-contradictions almost in every western writer particularly in the above quoted ones. Similar is the problem with Shri Ram Swarup,
Similarly, he was wasted his energy on another non-issue that is the Sikhism is not of a Muslim origin.
Therefore, later, I shall seek to support my argument from the primary source and shall keep in view the structure of Sikh religion.
Now, let us examine the main concern of Shri Ram Swarup:
- Wearing a sacred thread (Janeu) is must fora Hindu. His initiation in Hindu Religion is confirmed only by this ceremony. But, Guru Nanak in the face of stiff attitude from his family elders refused to wear it. He has clearly expressed his unwillingness to wear it and thus to be initiated into Hinduism. In his Bani he pays:
-Let mercy be the cotton,
-Contentment be the thread,
-Countenance be the knot,
-Truth be the twist.
-Such a Janeu (sacred thread) is for the soul,
(Raj Asa m.1,p.471).
Thus, right in the beginning, he makes a departure from the existing set of principles of a religion and attempt at evolving anew religion, a religion for the soul.
After a hazardous meditation and concentration for about three days, he decided to launch his campaign for spiritual awakening of mankind, to free it from spiritual and physical slavery, to inspire it to live an honorable social life and to awake to fight the political repression, To this effect there are examples in his Bani on abundance, But, in the beginning of this journey which he undertook for about 20 years, he unambiguously declared that he was “neither a Musalman nor a Hindu”. Thereby, right in the beginning, he set the issues straight. He was not to use the instruments provided by Hindu religion or Islam. He had a set of principles to be ingrained in the minds of the people, and a method to achieve this aim. These were alien to both the contemporary religions. He was trying at the third alternative and this he made, as said above, very clear, right in the beginning of his mission,
3.Bhai Gurdas, in his Var-I, Pauri-33, records that while in Mecca Sharif, the Muslim clergy asked Guru Nanak whether he was a Muslim or a Hindu. Guru Nanak denied his affiliation with the both. Reasserting that in the absence of a moral character both were weeping.
4.When hundred soldiers (Singhs) of Banda Singh Bahadur were being executed everyday (this continued for seven days) in Delhi, one day an old mother and newly married wife of a young Singh brought the orders from the higher authority to the
- Most of those who converted to Sikhism were Hindu of course a few were Muslims. But on becoming a Sikh/Singh his previous religion and caste links were declared to be Severed. Secondly, if Shri Ram Swarup’s argument is stretched further and also historically examined mostof the Muslims in India are originally converts from Hindus, Nobody has ever said that they are Hindus. Similarly the Buddhist and many more people be called members of the Hindu Religion Will Christians be Jew and what not? Then a question will arise that where from are the roots of Hinduism? Did it come from vacuum? Is it possible to reverse the historical process? Yes it is surely possible. Everything is possible at any time. But for that you have to be and to use a different metal.
Let us examine the main points On which Shri Ram Swarup is basing his main concern.
- Vedas: Vedas are sacred books of Hindus. They believe them to be the revealed scriptures and also complete or perfect in containing the whole reality, the total knowledge, But, Sikh Gurus believe them to be sacred upto the extent that they reveal only that part of the reality which God wants to convey through them. Secondly, the number of gods worshipped by Vedic people, their complicated system of religious rituals, and their deification of the natural elements and the methods of worship prescribed in them are not acceptable to the Sikh Gurus. So much so that they do not believe that Vedas can reveal even the truth about God Himself. Guru Nanak says:
“God is outside of,
Bed, Kateb and worldliness,
He is the God (Patshah) of Guru Nanak,
He (Guru Nanak) can see Him clearly.
(G.G.SP. 397)
Thirdly, word Veda is mostly followed by word Kateb (as above). Would it mean, Muslims, Christians, Jews etc. roots of Sikhism?
- Aviar- Hindu concept of Avtar means God descends upon earth in the human form. It happens repeatedly to promote and reestablish the already declining religion (Dharma). Sikh Gurus, hence Sikhs, do not believe it. They believe that God, Formless Reality does not need to take a human form or send messengers for the above said missions, He is competent enough to operate in his original form. Secondly, Sikhs do not believe that any Avtar is competent enough to do anything. God is the only and final competence. Everyone created by Him (including Avtars of the Hindus) is under His command. An Avtar is functioning in a given paradigm and, therefore, is equal with others in the presence of God. Thus, an Avtar and an insignificant worm are equal in status. Thirdly, according to Sikh Gurus, different Avtars were only the kings of their time, later on people came to deify them (god), “He created kings in various ages. People exalted them to Avtar hood and sang about them, They (Avtars) could also not estimate Him (God)”. [Asa.var.3, Ashatpati, p.423, For this also see G.G.S-Pages, 516, 894, 1037.)
(to be continued)
(Dr.Darshan Singh is Professor & Chairman of Guru Nanak Sikh Studies Department, Punjab University, Chandigarh. He has written several books on Sikh Studies.
He has been teaching Post-graduate classes for the past 20 years. He has supervised research work of several dozen students,
Besides he has, to his credit, general books an on Sikh Studies. Guru Nanak Sikh Studies chair at Chandigarh is One of the three chairs of Sikh Studies. The other two are headed by Prof Harbang Singh (P and Dr.Madanjit Kaur (Amritsar).
Article extracted from this publication >> July 26, 1991
