Dear Editor,

I have read the comments with great concern from two critics (S. Manmohan Singh: WSN, February 17. 1995 and Dr. Ravinder Singh: WSN, March 10, 1995) on my article entitled. “Gurdwara Degeneration in Understanding of its Principles which appeared in series in WSN (January 13, 20. 27. February 10. 17, 1995). I would like to express my feelings to the critics that the job of a critic is very hard and tough from intellectual point of view. Because a critic is one who expresses a reasonable opinion in any matter involving a judgment of its value, truth righteousness, beauty, or technique I am sorry to write that both the critics (one being a fellow scientist) did not perform the duties of a critic properly, because they did not express their opinion with any authentic reference or any logic. They just wrote their wishful thinking in emotion, ignoring scientific and logical norms. My response to their criticism is as follows:

  1. Improper Interpretation of Gurbani:
  2. Manmohan Singh quoted the following stanza to support his point that mere possession of high scholastic university degree does not make more capable and competent in comprehension of Gurbani, and the comprehension is through the Grace of Satguru himself.

He interpreted it as follows: “Only that rare person can comprehend the truth in Gurbani who has surrendered himself completely to the will of the Guru.”

His above interpretation does not convey the real message of Guru Nanak. The most appropriate interpretation could be as follows: “A rare person would deliberate (discuss/ponder) over the Gurbani. (Who is that rare person?) The one who is a Gurmukh. (Who is a Gurmukh?) According to Gurbani it is a person who deliberates over the Gurbani and after comprehension, practices the teachings of the Guru given in the Gurbani

I had already explained in my article under entices about the importance of deliberation ( 4) Gurbani and it is the first step to comprehend the Gurbani. It should be carried out in the sangat in the Gurdwara and every Sikh (Amridhari and non-Amritdhar) has the right to participate. It is through the deliberation, the comprehension of Gurbani is achieved and it is through practicing of the teachings in the Gurbani the Grace of the Almighty (salvation is achieved. A good deliberation is carried out only when the participants have sound knowledge of languages, history, various sciences, etc. 2. Sikh Code of Conduct:

S.Manmohan Singh has taken the aid of definition of a Sikh given in the Sikh Code of Conduct, to criticize my work. The Code of Conduct should be taken seriously by the Sikhs. If it is a code then it must be written like a code and should be interpreted as a code (Code = a systematic statement of a body of law, especially one given statutory force). Since it is considered as a statute, therefore, it ought to be free from redundancies and uncertainties, and must not be capable of being understood in two or more possible senses. Unfortunately it is not go with the present Code of Conduct, published by the SGPC. Let us examine a few statements from it.

(a) Status: On its first page the last paragraph says: “The SGPC in its meeting of February 3, 1945 vide resolution # 97 has approved to do additions and deletions according to the recommendations of Religious Advisory Committee.” It means that there were some additions and deletions, recommended by the Religious

Advisory Committee to be done but it is not clear from it and elsewhere in the text whether the recommended additions and deletions were done or not. It is also not clear when and by whom it was declared as a statute. I have not come across any such edict (hukmnama), issued by the Akal Takht or SGPC, where the presently circulated Sikh Rchat Maryada (Sikh Code of Conduct) has been declared as a statute for the Sikhs. In spite of the above facts almost all the Amritdhari Sikhs were unanimous in accepting it as an approved statute by the Akal Takht and the SGPC, when I discussed it with them.

(b) Definition of a Sikh: My statement, “Unfortunately the definition of a Sikh given the Rehit Maryada is not understood properly by these Amritdharis. (For more details on definition of a Sikh see reference 16).” was used by S.

Manmohan Singh to criticize my work. In spite of my request, he has ignored to look into the reference # 16 (Sikh Review, May, 1994; also in WSN of April and May issues of 1992) on which my above statement was based. Let us discuss briefly the definition of a Sikh again for the interest of the readers of WSN:

The literal translation is as follows: “A woman or a man who believes in one Almighty, ten Guru Sahibans (from Sri Guru Nanak Dev ji to Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib), Sri Guru Granth Sahib and Bani and advice of ten Guru Sahibans and the Amrit of Dasmesh ji and does not accept any other religion, is a Sikh.”

  1. Manmohan Singh has interpreted ‘nischa’ as ‘full faith and belief in the above definition to criticize my work is follows: “It is thus understood that to be a Sikh it is obligatory and imperative to be blessed with the holy Amrit as finally ordained by Sahib Shri Guru Gobind Singh Ji. “I am sorry to say that ‘faith’ or ‘belief cannot be interpreted as ‘obligatory’ or ‘imperative’ under any circumstances. Academically it is unfair to interpret a statement according to own whims. I had pointed out in ref # 16 that although the above definition is better than those found in the literature, it still needs some improvements to make it a perfect definition. Devinder Singh Chahal, Ph.d. Note: Professor Chahals response to be continued

Article extracted from this publication >> April 7, 1995