By D. S. Gill

Sarbat Khalsa held on January 26, 1986, at the Akal Takhat, while posthumously honouring the late Sant Jarnail Singh Khalsa Bhindranwale, Bhai Amrik Singh and General Subeg Singh for scarifying their lives to defend the Darbar Sahib during operation “blue star”, restored the supremacy of the Akal Takhat by appointing a Committee of Panj Piaras to look after the affairs of the Panth.

The supremacy of the Akal Takhat in the Sikh polity , which was systematically eroded wittingly by the Delhi Darbar and unwittingly by the Takhat’s Jathedars who became puppets in the hands of Delhi or the S.GP.C., had boosted the Sikh militant struggle aimed at freedom of the Khalsa Panth from the strangle hold of the Delhi Darbaris .

Whether the Sarbat Khalsa is organised by one group or the other, it is a unique institution which gives recognition to the importance of the power of the masses. The institution was founded by Guru Gobinb Singh. This institution of collective leadership remained sidelined for decades Cliques of politicians and self-appointed Jathedars maneuvered behind the scenes vital matters were clinched.

According to Hari Ram Gupta first Gurmata was passed at Nander five days before the demise of Guru Gobind Singh on October 3, 1708, in which Tenth Master announced the abolition of Guruship in human being and invested it in the holy Granth for all times to come. The Guru affirmed that all the affairs of the Panth would be regulated by a Council of Five Beloved Ones. It was adopted by Sarbat Khalsa and its execution was binding upon the whole Panth

Any infringement was to be considered sacrilegious.

The Council of Panj Piaras was answerable to its parent body (Sarbat Khalsa) which had the power to change it whenever it was deemed necessary. The principle of responsibility involved in this practice was useful and necessary in so far as it kept the leadership on guard , says Bisheshwar Prasad, editor of book, “Ideals in History” pp. 1981-99.

The Five Member Committee had a variety of problems for their deliberations. It elected the Jathedar and chief leader of the Dal Khalsa chose agents who were entrusted with the power to negotiate with the others on behalf of the Sikhs. Secondly, by the “Gurmata” they decided foreign policy to be pursued by the Sikhs.

 Thirdly, they drew up plans of military operations against the « common enemies of the Panth and fourthly, they took measures for the spread of the Sikh faith and management of the Gurdwaras

All the public affairs of the Sikhs were debated at the Sarbat Khalsa by the Panthic leadership and unanimously resolved such as alliances, wars and excursions intended to be made in the ensuing year. In his book, “Rise of the Sikh Power”, Sinha mentions: “A real democratic element was there in their constitution and in external appearance it was an aristocracy but in spirit it was undoubtedly a democracy.”

But according to Sikh Gurus, the State is to be obeyed not because of one’s religions duty but as a political necessity. Sikhism does not attach any sacred character to the State and, therefore, it is not sacred duty of a Sikh to obey the State. In case of conflict of loyalty towards religion was to take precedence over the State. After the annexation of Punjab by the British, the position further deteriorated. Akal Takhat was tuned into ordinary historical shrine gradually, it came under the direct control of the British Government and the Government used the puppet … Jathedars of Akal Takhat for its ends.

It is strange that Akal Takhat did not, in any way, react to the Sikh situation in 1947 at the time of partition of Indian subcontinent into two countries. Akal Takhat did not call Sarbat Khalsa, nor did it issue any “Hukamnama” to Sikhs as to how they should take up the question of a “Sikh State”.

Recently after the operation “Blue Star” in which Akal Takhat was demolished and Sikhs massacred in Delhi and Congress (I) ruled States in the wake of assassination of Mrs. Indira Gandhi, the Sikh High Priests remained silent spectators. The more surprising is the fact that the Akal Takht Chief acted in tune with the wishes of Delhi.

Had all’ Sikhs, under all circumstances, been bound to obey these Jathedars, they would still be supporting puppet priests, who did not allow even Guru Tag Bahadur to enter the holy precincts of Darbar Sahib at Amritsar, honoured General Dyre and excommunicated the Babbar Akalis.

Sangat alone is the final authority in Sikh affairs and it was so even during the life time of Gurus. Sangat ordinarily articulates itself through the agency of “Panj Piaras” chosen by it. When it meets as Sarbat Khalsa it expresses its will on Panthic affairs through Gurmatta which is binding on all Sikhs.

Efforts have been made in the recent times by those who either have no understanding of the Sikh religion and history or are under the influence of Delhi Darbar, to dilute and confuse the role of the Sikh ‘Sangat’. Instead a permanent priestly class is sought to be bolstered over the Sikh masses not necessarily in their vital interests but to lull them into submission to that class and its political interests.

These developments were more than enough to provoke Sikhs to ponder over the question of sacrilege of Akal Takht. The act of conduct of the Akal Takht chief and other Singh Sahibs shook the Sikh Panth and the Sikhs rose as a body against the puppet Jathedars and restored the supremacy of the Akal Takht by choosing Panj Piaras at the Sarbat Khalsa held on January 26, 1986 to run the Panthic affairs and to lead the Sikh struggle to regain sovereignty of the Khalsa Panth.

The main task before the Panthic, collective leadership of the Akal Takht was to change the hierarchical stratification which had been a great hurdle in ushering an era of true human equality and freedom. In this direction, the Panthic militant leadership has made reasonably good progress. But the second much more difficult task of changing man from within remains unsolved.

If the past historical experience can be taken as a reliable guide, it will take a long time. Besides the dilemmas faced by revolution, the caravan of revolutions, says Jagjit Singh in his book, “Revolution” — another perspective view of the Sikh Revolution, moves slowly and in a zig zag manner. Structural changes of political nature might be contrived by a resolution within a short period, but the second complimentary part of the revolutionary process, the change of human sentiments, attitudes, habits, etc. moves with a slowness almost comparable to the kind of change of geologist studies.

SUPPORT SIKH CAUSE SUBSCRIBE TO WORLD SIKH NEWS

Article extracted from this publication >> August 19, 1988