By Sukhbir Singh
“The Guru made the Sikhs to protect the Hindus”; so preach the clever Hindus, so have the Sikhs grown accustomed to believe, and so says Prof. Bhutani — a dyed-in-the-wool Hindu pretending to be an admirer of Sikhism! He coaxes the Sikhs into action: “Charh ja beta sooli pe, Allah bhali karen ge — go get on the gallows, son, God will reward you.” To the Hindus he promises peace in Punjab: “hard core of Sikhs is a hostile force … government has to deal with them at gunpoint”; “(they) must within 24 hours be punished openly and publicly”; “Militarily … government should give them no quarter, here and abroad.” Bhutani further recommends that all Sikhs from 15 to 35 years of age should be dispersed all over India, and kept in Cantonments to be watched.
A CALCULATED _INSULT: On the one hand “Lao ji, Guruji ne Sikh banaaye Hinduan di rakshaa vaaste; Ohnaan naal laraayi kaadi? — Come, come; Guru made the Sikhs for the protection of the Hindus; why fight them?” And on the other ‘“‘Sardarji tuhaade baraan vajje ne” — Sardarji you have gone bonkers. “If a statement is calculated to insult a community, it is this. “Does the sole purpose of the practitioners of a set of religious principles, is to be the eternal “chowkidars — security guards,” of an abhorrent and rejected way of life? Were all those sacrifices and “Sikhi di kahInaa kaalhi’” — the Sikhs treaded a rugged and rightous path,” to facilitate the Hindu’s continued practice of the very same habits which the Gurus condemned over and over? Unfortunately, the above admonition comes mostly from the “pareh likhe —(literate and wise in the tongue in cheek sense Sikhs. What a blind and unswerving loyalty of the Sikhs! The Hindus love it all. Such an audacious belief that the Sikhs exist for, or it is their “dharam” — “duty,” to protect the Hindus, smacks of Brahmanism: “It is your dharam and “karam” — destiny, to be “Chamar,” “Chandal,” “Chuhra” — lowest possible status in Hindu system, etc.”! Present it all.
MISSION OF SIKHISM? For an ordinary Sikh an appreciation of the mission of Sikhism is not relevant. For him question does not even arise; why has he to know about it? He is not expected to engage in debates or sell Sikhism to make converts. He replies to the curious: ‘‘come to our Gurdwara and see how we do it.” His beliefs are entirely personal and practical. He has been raised to believe in “panjkake —saw cred Sikh symbols, 1( Gurus, “panj payare” — 6 apostles, one God, and equality of human beings His tradition is sacred to him. He is raised to believe that his “dharam” — duty. is to believe, unquestionably, in whatever his ancestors did and believed in When someone comes along and tells him that “Guru made the Sikhs to protect the Hindus,” he does not go about to be consulting libraries. He goes ahead and does the needful; and suddenly the Sikh finds a purpose in life! He has now joined the other Sikh vic: times of catch 22: The Sikhs are separate from the Hindus because they don’t like what the Hindus practice. But the Sikhs must sacrifice their rights and sons to protect the Hindu’s right to practice contrary to what the Sikhs preach!
SIKHS BRAINWASHED: For countless generations, the Hindus have enslaved their fellow humans. They perfected a social system which made slavery into a religious institution: Every one’s status was fixed at birth! The unfortunate “Sudras” — lowest status in Hindu social system, served everyone above them; particularly the “dwijanamas — twice born” (Brahmins and Kshatriyas). “Yeh tumhare karamon ka phal hai — it is a result of your sins in the previous births,” they were told. The Sikhs broke away from this “chakkar’” — endless spiral. But not quite, yet; Hindus don’t give up easily. Success of Sikhism — in various endeavors of life, brought home the glaring deficiencies in the Hindu system. The Hindus made best of the bad situation, however, and started a clever and patient sabotage of the infant movement. Not before long they had managed, successfully, to bring the Sikhs around and convince them: “Guru made the Sikhs to protect the Hindus’! Sikhs were once again on square one! Sikhs thought they had broken free from the Hindu system, but in fact, got trapped in the Hindu’s master scheme: The former Sudras, now had an exalted title, but were obliged to serve the Hindu master as his “protector”, and ‘Cannon fodder”. For some of the Sikhs, however, Sikhism had been a mere change of name, anyway: They had donned the turban, but continued to practice whatever rest of the Hindu household did!
HINDUS ALWAYS FOUGHT AGAINST THE SIKHS;: Ever since the time of Guru Arjun, in the early 1600, to the betrayal of the Khalsa army in 1849 by the Dogra Hindu generals, the Hindus have fought on the opposite side! And when the Hindus were not fighting the Sikhs they were instigating the Mughals or the British against the Sikhs. You see, the Dogras had accepted hefty bribes to cut off the bridges behind the Khalsa army; and to send gunny bags full of mustard seed and garbage, in place of gunpowder, to the Khalsa gunners. Much has been made of Indira Gandhi’s assassination at the hands of her own “Sikh body guards”; But do the Sikhs remember the treacherous Gangu Brahmin — a long time servant and confidant of Guru Gobind Singh: Gangu was entrusted to escort Guru’s mother — Mata Gujri, and his two sons to safety. Gangu promptly sold the boys to the Mughal governor — Wazir Khan. And, then Sucha Nand, Hindu advisor of Wazir Khan, exhorted the Governor to execute the boys because “the young ones of a snake are as poisonous”! Do the Sikhs need to be reminded about Guru Arjun’s Hindu tormentor Chandu Shah, and Guru Gobind Singh’s opposition by Hindu Pahari Rajas. And how about Lakhpat Rai — Hindu minister of Punjab’s Governor Zakaria Khan, who had vowed to “erase their name (the Khalsa’s) from the page of existence”, and was responsible for “Chhota Ghallughara’” — the holocaust, on 10 March, 1746: Nearly seven thousand fell in the battle, and three thousand were later executed at Shahidganj in Lahore! And, now the ever increasing animosity between the two groups, in the past 100 years: There has not been much demonstration of alleged brotherly kinship! There is increasing use of the pronoun they than us!
MARTYRDOM FOR FREEDOM OF WORSHIP: The Sikhs proudly relate the story of a deputation of Kashmiri Brahmins seeking the 9th Guru’s intervention against the Islamic tyranny of Emperor Aurangzeb. The Guru accepted to debate Islam as the final and exclusive deposit of truth, with the Imperial court; he knew fully well that a loss of debate and (his) rejection of consequent invitation to embrace Islam will result in automatic penalty of death according to a basic state law of Islam. Sikh tradition tells us that Guru’s 9 year old urged him that a “maha purkh” — prominent person, be sacrificed! Then there is the Tenth Guru’s own testimony of “Tilak janeo rakha prabh takaa” — he defended their (Hindu’s) right to bear their religious symbols. However, the Gurus have left us no record of any commandment: “Sikhs, thou shalt protect the Hindus”! One could easily read into the Guru’s lines a_ refrain: “Look what my father did, and what they are now doing to us! But where is anyone’s testimony that “Sikhs should protect the Hindus”? It seems like a patent Brahmin fabrication; a planted story! Brahmins, from time immemorial, have sold the Indians similar stories: “Rawan was a Rakshas” — subhuman! “Manu was a god”; “Sudras are born with limited rights”; “Gandhi was a Mahatama — saint! Joseph P. Goebbels — propaganda director for the Nazis, must. have been a Hindu once; he is credited with: “If you tell a big enough lie, often enough, everyone will believe it.””
BHUTANI’’S SNAKE OIL: “But for the terrible sacrifices of the Sikh Gurus, Hinduism in Northern India would have perished”; and, “Sikhism had emerged as a power to protect the Hindus”; So says Prof. D.H. Bhutani in his “The Third Sikh War? Towards or Away from Khalistan?” — 1986. But Bhutani’s is an intriguing book; he loses no time before he advises his reader: “To say that the Sikhs are with us has no meaning. It is true that many of them are good … hardcore of the Sikhs is a hostile force and the government has to deal with them at gunpoint.” Bhutani claims to be an admirer of Guru Nanak’s message: The good professor tells the reader that his “wife daily reads Guru Granth Sahib and prays for him”; his Sikh friends, appropriately, parallel Guru Nanak’s eclectic companions: “Sardar Gurdial Singh Sindhi of Jat Sikh family”, and a family friend “Sardar Lakbir Singh Suri.” Bhutani describes events leading to that famous refrain of the betrayed and beaten Khalsa on 12 March 1849, “Aj Ranjit Singh mar gaya” — (Maharaja) Ranjit Singh died today. Doesn’t Bhutani remind you of the adage “Maan naaloon hejli phafe kuttan — the witch demonstrates more affection than the mother.”
BHUTANI BLOWS HOT & COLD: Bhutani’s book is worth reading: He takes the reader through spells of witch’s “palkhand” — affectations foreplay, followed by deadly jabs like those of a man goose on the Cobra! Bhutani is appreciative of the brutal and expedient justice of the Sikhs of Ranjit Singh’s regime; he writes: “The Sikhs fought no frontier wars. Their punishment for the invader was swift and sharp — immediate slaughter. As soon as a Pathan stuck out his head beyond the Khyber, he was decapitated.” Bhutani is saddened by the events of post Operation Blue Star, and bewails: “Every Sikh is a terrorist, so the Hindus believed; every Hindu, an agent of imperial power at Delhi, so the Sikhs imagined”. Notice his choice of imagine — “waiham”, and believe — “yageen”! Bhutani is quite frustrated by the handling of “Sikh Problem”: “The best encouragement they receive is our soft attitude. They see the pleasant face of Rajiv Gandhi . . . we cannot buy out the entire Sikh leadership”. Reader will be impressed by Bhutani’s choice of pronouns — “us”, “we’’ and “our” for Hindus and India, and “they” for the Sikhs!
GENERAL CUSTER— BHUTANI: Bhutani boasts that his “book deals in a final way with the syndrome of Khalistan”. He continues: “The British invested in Sikhs out of all proportions to their numbers; and the Sikhs paid back. This then is the clue to the psyche of the Sikh”. Bhutani’s “correct historical perspective’: ‘‘the storming of the Golden Temple was only the first round of battle in which the government gained only the right of entry. Within the sovereign power of the state; and if they (Sikhs) breached the rules of the game, they would come under fire’. According to Bhutani: “These Gurdwaras have plenty of money and they are also getting money from abroad, apart from military pensions which they (Sikhs) continue to get”. Another gem from Bhutani—“bani”: “Militarily we must equip ourselves to fight the Pakistani element and the Khalistani element and give them no quarter, here or abroad”. “There should be summary trials”. “.. . He (terrorist) must be within 24 hours handed over to the army for summary treatment”. Be warned Khalistan, General Custer Bhutani has now proclaimed: “A good Sikh is a dead Sikh”! (US general and American Indian fighter, George Custer is reputed to have said, “A good Indian is a dead Indian”.
BHUTANI’S FINAL SOLUTION OF THE “SIKH PROBLEM”: Bhutani asks: “Why cannot their (Sikh’s) unique amalgam of qualities as farmer fighters be commandered to serve the national interest?”. He urges the government: “reeruit Sikh young men for the army on as large a scale. . . the army authorities will have to exercise considerable wisdom in dispersing them all over India and placing them in cantonments where they do not constitute more they would of course, know that a close watch would be kept on them. This is imperative . . . ”. Bhutani is now getting bolder, and he continues: “All boys in the Punjab between the ages of 15 to 85 years could be offered a training stipend of Rs. 200/a month and posted in various capacities throughout India where we can use these men”. Mark Bhutani’s generosity on the size of stipend! I wonder if someone could persuade Bhutani to volunteer and go parley his brand of “peace in Punjab’, with some of the “lucky” Sikh mothers, fathers, sisters and wives! These parents would rather have their sons in “Kala Pani” — dreaded Andaman Is lands used for the banishment of British India’s political prisoners, than be the slave “citizens” of Bhutani’s “Demon crazy”!
BHUTANI IS HIMMLER INCARNATED: Prof, Bhutani sounds as smooth and sincere as Himmler (Nazi German chief of Gestapo) must have sounded when selling his plan of “relocation” to the Jews for their safety. But the good professor’s salesmanship vanishes when he plays, simultaneous defender, prosecutor, judge and jury. In order to blemish the Sikh grievances he relishes in describing the decadent life styles of the Sikh rulers of the Phulkian states. Bhutani has claimed every qualification to pass as a “Hindu Friend” of the Sikhs — the only one missing is his lack of any near or distant blood relation who could masquerade as a Keshdhari Sikh! We are told that he is a highly regarded economist, and he enjoys the confidence of the government: Reminds one of the fables of “Andher nagari, chaupat raja — incompetent governor and lawless town!” Another fable tells us that lord Shiva earned the post of ‘‘destroyer of the Worlds” because he consumed “vish” — poison, from the “ocean of life”; our good Professor Bhutani must have consumed the “tari” — Palm ligour, of Shiv Sena! Prof. Bhutani sinks to a new low when he chuckles that “Sikh religion has evolved with its leadership from Guru Nanak to Bhindrawale! What a choice at making comparisons: Field Marshal and foot soldier!
A HERETICAL CONJECTURE: A lovely incident of which any father or mother will be proud: An innocent 9 years old is concerned over his father’s predicament, and lets out his pintsized suggestion: “Who else, but you dad, can do it’? Very likely, little did the innocent 9 years old appreciate that the very Brahmins at his father’s door, had incessantly harassed his ancestors, and had connived to get his predecessor and his great grandfather eliminated. Here they were now to talk the Guru into another of their innocent sounding master schemes; the punch line of many an Indian fables: “The great calamity can only be averted by “lkise mahapurkh di_bali deni chahi di eh” — some prominent person must be offered to be sacrificed”. What a “super use” they are proposing for the greatest ever “leader of the Hindus”! As if he had nothing better to do! And what a clever way to get their competition removed! And what. an equitable division of roles of leadership of non-Muslims! “Khoo wich chalivaan hissa, te jutian da adh o adh” — 1/40th share in the venture, but responsible for half of the loss! And the Guru said, “No problem”; “I will go right away’! On the contrary, the Sikh tradition has a saner explanation: The Guru did intervene on behalf of the Hindus, not as a leader of Hindus or to protect their skins; but, to lay down his life against the tyranny of a state religion, and to defend man’s (and Kashmiri Brahmin’s!) right of “freedom to worship”. And what a gratitude the sons and daughters of Kashmiri Brahmins have now returned the Sikhs!