By: Center Of Sikh Studies Santa Ana
We would not have bothered about Dr. Sulakhan Singh Dhillon’s irrelevant note in the India West of September 10 & September 24, 1993, if it had not betrayed gross ignorance of facts and truth about Pashaura Singh’s thesis.
Mr.Dhillon’s first misstatement is blaming Daljeet Singh & Jasbir Singh Mann of groupism in the case when he knows clearly that Pashaura Singh’s thesis has evoked an international academic response & following 21 Sikh Scholars :( 1.Dr, Surinder Singh Kohli (former Prof. & Head Dept. of Punjabi, Punjab University, and Chandigarh)
- Dr Balkar Singh (Prof. & Head Dept. of Guru Granth Sahib Studies, Punjabi, University Patiala India)
- Dr.Darshan Singh (Prof. & Chairman Dept. of Guru Nanak Sikh Studies, Punjab Univ. Chandigarh, India)
- Dr. Gurnam Kaur (Reader Dept. of Guru Granth Sahib Studies Punjabi Univ. Patiala, India) 6_Dr.Devinder Singh Chahil (Prof. Univ. du Quebec Laval. Quebec, Canada) 6.Dr.Sukhminder Singh (Prof. & Head Santa Clara, Univ. CA.) 7. DrRanbir Singh Sandhu (Prof. Civil Eng. Dept., Ohio State Univ., Columbus, Ohio.)
8.DrPiar Singh (Dept. of Guru Nanak Studies, Guru Nanak Dev Univ,, Amritsar, India) 9.Dr.Kharak Singh(PhD Ohio State Univ,, Columbus, Ohio, Editor Abstracts of Sikh Studies) 10.Dr.Gurbaksh Singh Gill (PhD Ohio State Univ,, Columbus Ohio Former Dean Agriculture Univ. Ludhiana, India)
11 Sardar Gurtej Singh (Nat’ Prof. of Sikhism, India)
- Dr.Gurmail Singh Sidhu (PhD. British Columbia Univ., Vancouver, Canada, presently Prof, at Cal State Fresno) 43.Sardar Kuldeep Singh (President Sikh Youth Federation, Toledo, Ohio)
14 Sardar Iqbal Singh Sara (Barrister and Solicitor, Vancouver Canada, President All Canada Sikh Federation)
I5.Dr.Harjinder Singh Dalgeer (Director Guru Nanak Institute of Sikh Studies, Norway)
16, Sardar Manohar Singh Marco (Director Marco Research Foundation, New Delhi, Authority on old manuscripts of Sikh Religion)
- Prof. Manjit Singh Sidhu (Panjab Univ Chandigarh, India)
- Dr.Hakam Singh (PHD
U.CLA. President Sikh Welfare Foundation)
- Dr.Balwant Singh Dhillon (Deph of Guru Nanak Studies, Gur Nanak Univ., Amritsar}
- Dr.Piara Singh (PhD Beverly Hills Univ.)
- DrJinderjit Singh (New York Univ.) has written articles in response to his thesis. Dr. Sulakhan is in possessions of all these articles but still side tracking the issues for reasons known to him.
All above authors are well known in the Field of Sikh Studies, They have published hundreds of books. Contributed thousands of articles and submitted many doctoral Theses in Sikh Studies. Nobody has ever Challenged Dr. Pashaura Singh’s decent habits or his family as a Sikh model family, but questions have been rose what he has written in black and white.
His second major misstatement 1s that the Controversy is about an academic issue, The allegation against Pashaura Singh is that he has committed a blasphemous or criminal act, His third misstatement i§ that the Committee appointed by SGPC consisted no experts, but the, committee which has accused him of blasphemy included the Heads of Departments of Religious Studies if the Panjab University Chandigarh and the Punjabi University Patiala, besides the Principal and two Exprincipals of a Postgraduate College of Comparative Religion affiliated to a university. The unanimous recommendations of the Expert Committee were: (a) Pashaura Singh should be dealt with at the religious level by the Akal Takht, (b) he should be prosecuted according to the Law, and (c) the background of the case should be investigated, since there were suspicious circumstances suggesting a planned attack on the authenticity and integrity of the Guru Granth and the Gurus.
The reported suspicious circumstances are numerous. A few of them are indicated below:
(1) An article was published in 1987 and again in 1990 under the name of Dr.Loehlin, an old functionary and colleague of Dr.McLeod at the Christian Mission Batala. This article says that Sikhs and their friends have started work for textual analysis of the Adi Granth abroad. Pashaura Singh is the only Sikh, and Dr.McLeod is the only supposed friend of the Sikhs who had initiated such work abroad Quotations from this article from the justification and beginning of Pashaura Singh’s chapter on Textual Analysts, The truth is that Dr. Loehlin died in August 1987, and Since 1983 stood admitted as a virtual invalid in an Old Home for Missionaries, The daughter of Dr. Loehlin and the Administrator of the Home have indicated that Dr. Loehlin was neither capable of nor wrote any such paper after 1983. The question is who wrote what apparently bogus letter and why? Since the article: was quoted and used by Pashaura Singh guided by McLeod, Dr.Jasbir Singh Mann addressed a letter 10 Dr Joseph O. Collins, Dr. McLeod and Pashaura Singh to throw light as to who had written it, The query remains unrealized till to date. 2) The second suspicious circumstance is MS 1245 and its appearance from nowhere al Amritsar with a local dealer from whom the GND University Amritsar purchased it. The manuscript has no history whatsoever, name of the scribe, nor the date of writing. While Pashaura Singh’s entire thesis is based on this manuscript, he first saw tin 1990 for a few days at Amritsar, and it is indeed intriguing how he had submitted a synopsis, when he had not even seen it until 1990. Another suspicious fact is that although it was reported that the manuscript had been with the family of Baba Budh, Pashaura Singh never made any attempt to contact he family living so close to Amritsar, In fact, he observes that the dealer is reluctant to disclose its source, But on the other hand the dealer has voluntarily made three Statements: First, that he got it from Baba Budha’s source. Second, he got it from Mina Derain Rajasthan, and when told that there is no such Dera in that state, he changed his version to say that he got it from a street hawker (Rehri Wala). In fact the attempt is to conceal its source and not reveal it.
3) Another suspicious fact is about MS 1245 is that on its page 3, the compiler has pasted a forged mark which he calls that of the Sixth Master, and which Pashaura Singh concedes, is probably of the Ninth Guru, but tallies with that of the Ninth Guru. The suspicion, therefore, is that while Pashaura Singh calls Guru Arjun as the compiler of this manuscript, the real compiler is a forgerer, who had 2 motives in pasting the mark.
4) The clinching arguments that indicates conclusively the allegation of blasphemy against Pashaura Singh is that he calls the MS 1245 ad raft by Guru Arjun, even though in the contents of the manuscript the death date of Guru Arjun is recorded in the same hand and ink as the writing of the scribes before or after that entry, The photocopies of this page and entry have been conveyed to the University of Toronto, without any response, The: learned philosopher would concede that a book or manuscript which narrates the death date of a person, could never have been authored by him. Evidently nobody with moderate sense would make such a Statement, unless he had a motive in so doing. In fact, there are numerous other factors which cast doubt on the entire affair resulting in the thesis.
The ingredients of blasphemy are three, namely , that the statement should be false, that the author should know it be such, and that the statement should be defamatory to Gurus & Guru Granth Sahib Ji. The facts indicate that Pashaura Singh, who had noted the death date of Guru Arjun in the contents of the manuscript, knew that it would never be a document authored or compiled by him. Yet, knowing this truth, he made misstatement on page 28 of his thesis “furthermore folio 1255 the manuscript contains the death dates of the first five gurus only the last of which was written later on by the same scribe,”, So, he wrongly recorded that it was a draft by Guru Arjun, and later while recording the Kartarpuri Bir, he theologically and linguistically changed the Bani of Guns Nanak and passed the altered Bani as writing of Guru Nanak. There are numerous other blasphemous statements made by. Pashaura Singh on the assumption that the Manuscript 1245 is a draft compiled by Guru Arjun; Hence, the allegation being of the offence of blasphemy or libel, the matter is purely legal, defamatory to Guru Granth Sahib Jiand hence, not an academic issue. Conclusion of this research directly attacks Guro Granth , which is revered daily in Sikh homes and Gurdwaras, thus a calculated blasphemy, In Sikh religion seventh Nanak( Guru Har Rai) has clearly demonstrated what is blasphemy and how to handle it by excommunicating his own son. Ram Rai. As we look to blasphemy, and its application in this research we find all the grounds. Final verdict on this issue lies with Akal Takhat, Amritsar. Dr.Sulakhan S. Dhillon’s suggestion of carbon dating is, wholly, irrelevant. So far as MS 1245 is concerned, the truth is self-evident. It cannot be a draft by the Fifth Master, whose death dates the compiler records in it.
Dr.Sulakhan is in possession of Dr.Balwant Singh Dhillon’s detailed article from Guru Nanak Dey University Amritsar which clearly concludes that MS 1245 is part of Minas Literature (Breakaway Sikh Sect) written in latter part of the” 17th Century, Will Dr.Sulakhan give opinion about it? By using wrong physical evidence in his research Dr.Pashaura Singh came with wrong conclusions. Academics also need strong ethical norms; nobody in the disguise of Academic Freedom has the night to defame any religion by using unauthentic evidence. Why Sulakhan is ignoring the Academic facts? Textual analysis methodology can= not be applied to Guru Granth as it is compiled and authenticated by a living prophet (ref India west Sept.24, 1993) What Dr.Dhillon thinks about doctrine of Kachi versus Paeei Bani?
The doctrine of Kachi Bani’ versus Pakki Bani is very clear in Sikhism. Hence, question of conceivability by Guru Arjan is defamatory. We must remember that any attack on authenticity and integrity of Guru Granth Sahib Ji (Living Guru of Sikhs) will not go unanswered, Efforts have been made by Batala group of missionaries in past and presently with help of Sikh collaborators in disguise of researchers at Toronto and Columbia University(supported by offerings to Guru Granth) to diffuse the Sikh Identity by unethical academicians, Dr.Sulakhan and to Conspirators cannot force the Sikhs to learn from Meleod, O’Connel & Pashaura Singh’s “The Text And Meaning Of Adi Granth”, Every Sikh who has Sikhi Sidhak, may he be a Medical Doctor, retired civil servant, businessman, political scientist, educationist or priest (who reveres and bows before Guru Granth Sahib Ji) clearly understands the text meaning of Adi Granth, Hence, has the fundamental right to respond to such unethical research, Blasphemous attacks based on unethical researches die soon as the Sikhs know the truth.
In desperation Dr.Sulakhan has wandered with irrational and unacadermie thoughts which has nothing todo with real issue. There is no Virtue in derogating Guru Granth Sahib Jiby unethical research, but there is virtue in promoting Sikh Theology in the West by Sikhs specially the ones who get Sikh donations. Philosophers are known for absentmindedness, but not for irrelevance, ignorance or misstatements.
*The articles of all above scholars and one comprehensive editorial article blasphemous attacks “Abstracts of Sikh Studies” Jan.1993 issue is available for review at Sikh Center of Orange County Santa Ana, Ca., Readers interested in this issue can review these articles themselves.*
Center Of Sikh Studies is a’ society of Sikh scholars promoting Sikh theology located in southern California meets first the Friday of every month at = 2530 Warner Ave. Santa Ana Sikh Center of Orange County).
Article extracted from this publication >> October 15, 1993
