Dr ,Jagroop Singh reviews articles by Gurdarshan Singh Dhillon’s and Mohinder Singh Khaira in Panjab Times on 2 July 2020 on 9 July 2020 respectively
Two articles have appeared in the Punjab Times in quick succession, which are critical of western academics in Sikh Studies. Criticism was specifically aimed at Prabhsharandeep Singh & Arvindpal Mandair for his book, “Religion and the Specter of the West”. This article is my way of trying to make sense of all of these emerging issues and gain a better understanding. I also realize the inherent problems of reviewing and translating articles, which can introduce bias and partiality of it’s own. To that end, I urge readers to source original literature and make studious effort in gaining a more authentic understanding. The process of migration and the inevitable western educational framework that ‘conditions’ our mindset requires translation, interpretation and even further reinterpretation. Whilst this offers us an insight, it also alerts us to the dangers of inadequate nurturing in Gurmukhi language and the Gurmat spirit in formative years.
The two named academics are highly intelligent, well versed in their individual disciplines and with prolific literary achievements. Academics in general and these two in particular have invested years of personal study, training and significant amounts of their own resources. Their goal is to achieve career progression through intellectual currency of research and publication. It is not unusual for people in such important positions to become detached from society and totally focused with a ‘tunnel vision’ approach to a deconstructive analysis.
The purpose of higher education institutes is to serve humanity and endeavor to establish the truth. However, truth and differing perspectives are highly contested concepts with the right to ‘freedom of expression’ thrown in for good measure. It is commonly accepted that universities are businesses functioning under extreme competitive pressure of exclusivity and ranking systems. Furthermore, academics like politicians tend to develop complexity of expression with diplomatic tones that tends to marginalize and perhaps exclude the majority of the population. This is essentially a system of “us and them” or a “game of academic thrones”. All this is further compromised in the framing of research questions, which are specifically chosen by funding bodies?
Gurdarshan Singh Dhillon claims that Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) and its subsidiary organizations have strategic control of Sikh Studies in higher education and research institutes in India and more recently, in the developed world too. This point has been echoed for years by a number of academics and ‘lay’ critical thinkers without serious note or effect. Dharma Academy of North America (DANAM) is a particularly effective organization in making inroads to the university sector. However, in February 2020 University of California Berkeley’s Sikh Student Association (SSA) released an open letter expressing opposition to the campus Institute for South Asia Studies’ appeal for a 9 million dollars endowment from the Indian Government. In another email, the SSA board of directors said that in the past, the Indian government had tried to “build a presence on campus” by working to fund a Sikh Studies program at UC Berkeley with a multimillion-dollar endowment in February 2019.
Religion and the Specter of the West is a challenging book based on McLeod’s interpretive framework, which is consistent with earlier colonial assessments. The book is an evaluation of Sikh religion with reference to a western academic criterion, which imposes an inappropriate dominant power relationship. A critical review written by Dhillon on this publication in 2013 led to Prabhsharandeep making lengthy contacts and pleas in support of Arvind Pal Mandair. Prabhsharandeep was at pains to point out that the book is based on the superior platform of Hegel’s philosophy and signals the development of new paradigms in contemporary understanding and interpretive frameworks. He also wrote a supporting article to that effect in Panjab Times of Canada 15 February 2014.
Dhillon offers the following specific critique: –
- On page 388, “Since the Sikh subject has been determined as an essentially religious subject, then any aspiration that Sikhs have for political expression or subjectivity is necessarily a deviation from its religious nature” and makes a case for, “in order to reside in a pluralistic multicultural society, Sikh subjectivity must conform to the rule of the State”.
- On page 295, unduly complex intellectualization of historical evidence and the “logic of mimesis” to doubt and belittle Guru Nanak’s original mystical experience and describing “phenomenon called Sikhism corresponds to a degenerative evolution”.
- On page 254-5, “As we pass from Nanak to his successors, however, the quality of the original experience becomes diluted, and is further weakened by the active involvement of later Gurus in practical affairs and worldly politics. By the time we get to the Khalsa the original experience has been well and truly corrupted”. The traditional Sikh view is that the Nanak philosophy was strictly aligned, with the ‘Atmak Jote’ transference along the Guru lineage. The spiritual message was accentuated by constant reference to Nanak in their compositions of succeeding Gurus and further reinforcement by repetition albeit with subtle contextual variations.
- On page 211, displays a complex web of distorted thinking by stating that Singh Sabha movement were responsible for a ‘contrived interpretation’ in labeling Nanak as a “Prophet” to suit the sociopolitical challenges of that time (pseudo-theory). The Singh Sabha personnel were orthodox believers and would have depicted Guru Nanak as “Akaal Roop” (Dr Kanwaljit Singh, Sikh Siyasat Lecture). The sourcing and ‘sorting’ original manuscripts in the face of significant interference and interpolation by Arya Samajis became a necessary process, perhaps reviving but not reforming? The term reformist has only recently appeared in the history of Sikh literature and appears to be a borrowed term from the European Reformation movement? For Sikh people, this book presents an alienating experience and a paradigm shift beyond the pale. Nanak’s status can only be understood through sincere belief and/or through careful textual analysis of Guru Granth Sahib in line with a Gurmukh perspective. It is now widely acknowledged that authors must be open and transparent about their academic journey, allowing readers to decipher both conscious and unconscious bias. And at the same time declaration of funding streams is of public interest in judging potential conflict of interest.
- On page 369, Ik Onkar meaning of “One true God” is misconstrued and further confused by associating it with Om from Vedic texts.
- On page 229, Akaal Moorat is selectively and incorrectly analyzed in terms of being ‘outside of time’ but “Moorat” is portrayed existing as a form, shape &/or image? This is at odds with the overall meaning of the Mool Mantar.
- Mandair’s discussion on Naam Simran is both tortious and convoluted without achieving any newer understanding? Furthermore, the views expressed appear to be mimicking McLeod’s critique of old, contentiously suggesting that 6th Guru’s Miri Piri “deviated” from the ideal of ‘Nirgun Bhagti’ propagated by Guru Nanak and subsequent 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 5th Gurus (Page 254, Religion and the specter of the West)). He links Simran to its Sanskrit origins and relates it to death leading to subsequent relationship with God. In describing ‘superiority of Christianity’ in human salvation was a little curious and can only be taken as a personal opinion. Such views need to be suitably flagged up and honestly justified in avoiding suspicion of ulterior motives and contrived conclusions.
- Hard to follow analysis of Shabad Guru which is interpreted through “the metaphysics borrowed from the Christian philosophical theology” (page 332) and links “the metaphysics of sacred sound deriving from the Vedic economy”? “The concept of language in the teaching of the Sikh Gurus is deontologized”, effectively changed the entire meaning of the accepted norm?
- The entire book avoids reference to Banda Singh Bahadur as an exemplary Sikh who carried the torch of the 10th Nanak, Guru Gobind Singh Ji. He and 740 of his fellows were put to sword in the most horrific manner in front of East India Company officers by the Mughal regime. To overlook the ‘hunting at sight’ period that followed for the Sikhs could only be sustained by a deep belief and the special Gurmat philosophy. Banda set the tone of sovereignty and unique identity that sustained Sikhs through very difficult and lean periods eventually culminating in the Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s governance. It proved to be a period of stability, happiness and contentment hitherto unheard of and unseen in the Punjab. To assert that Sikhs had no separate Sikh religiosity existed prior to the Singh Sabha movement is simply false.
- Mandair’s arguments are exclusively based on Hegel’s philosophy from imperial and colonial Europe, which looked down on oriental religions. A philosophy supporting the power of the State over and above that of its citizens aiding the rise of fascism under Hitler cannot have credibility above Guru Nanak.
- These 2 academics were key participants and speakers in the 2009 “Berkeley Sikh Studies Conference: After 1984?” I believe, the primary focus of the conference was to forgive, forget and move on, eloquently expressed by “the work of mourning and forgiveness is by no means easy, it is by no means impossible either” in the final summary of the proceedings. Sikh Youth of America were the official hosts of an array of international speakers but the true funding trail remains mysterious.
Mohinder Singh Khaira makes reference to an article by Gurtej Singh (2017) asserting “dark forces intent on making &/or enabling textual changes to Gurbani”, in particular the removal of double lines either side of Jap within the Mool Mantar. This is indeed the thin end of the wedge and things have gone far beyond if truth be told. The Indian ‘funded’, western Sikh academics are busily engaged in critical evaluation through textual analysis of Gurbani using convenient philosophical criteria as a ‘means to an end’. Khaira goes on to express his disappointment at the “deafening silence” of the majority of Sikh commentators and institutions, as if nothing has happened?
ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਸਤਿ ਸਰੂਪੁ ਹੈ ਗੁਰਬਾਣੀ ਬਣੀਐ ॥
satigur kee baanee sat saroop hai gurbaanee baneeaai ||
The Word of the True Guru’s Bani is the embodiment of Truth; through Gurbani, one becomes perfect.
ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਰੀਸੈ ਹੋਰਿ ਕਚੁ ਪਿਚੁ ਬੋਲਦੇ ਸੇ ਕੂੜਿਆਰ ਕੂੜੇ ਝੜਿ ਪੜੀਐ ॥
satigur kee reesai hor kach pich boladhe se kooRiaar kooRe jhaR paReeaai ||
Jealously emulating the True Guru, some others may speak of good and bad, but the false are destroyed by their falsehood.
ਓਨੑਾ ਅੰਦਰਿ ਹੋਰੁ ਮੁਖਿ ਹੋਰੁ ਹੈ ਬਿਖੁ ਮਾਇਆ ਨੋ ਝਖਿ ਮਰਦੇ ਕੜੀਐ ॥੯॥
on(h)aa a(n)dhar hor mukh hor hai bikh maiaa no jhakh maradhe kaReeaai ||9||
Deep within them is one thing, and in their mouths is another; they suck in the poison of Maya, and then they painfully waste away. ||9||
(Guru Granth Sahib, page 304)
There are numerous examples of critical but disingenuous advocating a deconstructive textual analysis upon Gurbani. This genuine academic methodology has limited scope especially when it deliberately and exclusively ignores the holistic message/meaning. In 1987, a paper titled “Need for Textual and Historical Criticism” appeared under the name of Loehlin in the Sikh Courier (U.K.). However Loehlin being terminally ill at that time, his authorship was questioned and considered to be the subject of fraud and misuse of advocacy (Singh, Kharak & Kaur, Gurnam).
The ‘lost’ and suspect version/manuscript (MS1245) of a handwritten Guru Granth Sahib ‘emerged’ as a result of Piar Singh and Pashaura Singh alliance, probably under the guidance of H W McLoed. In being declared a genuine and authentic volume, this became one of the 3 primary sources used by Pashaura Singh for his PhD research thesis and subsequent book. This manuscript (MS1245) was labeled as false and therefore ‘nullifying’ any subsequent research based upon it (Coalition and Watchdog Agency, 2009).
Mandair’s analysis of Akaal Moorat is tantamount to heresy as it pretty much removes it from the Mool Mantar and adjoins it to idolatry. Mr Khaira was also disturbed by Mandair’s downplaying the role and contribution of the succeeding 9 Gurus after Nanak. And yet Gurbani clearly informs us: –
ਜੋਤਿ ਓਹਾ ਜੁਗਤਿ ਸਾਇ ਸਹਿ ਕਾਇਆ ਫੇਰਿ ਪਲਟੀਐ ॥
jot ohaa jugat sai seh kaiaa fer palaTeeaai ||
They shared the One Light and the same way; the King just changed His body.
(Guru Granth Sahib, page 966)
ਇਕਾ ਬਾਣੀ ਇਕੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਇਕੋ ਸਬਦੁ ਵੀਚਾਰਿ ॥
eikaa baanee ik gur iko sabadh veechaar ||
There is One Bani; there is One Guru; there is one Shabad to contemplate.
ਸਚਾ ਸਉਦਾ ਹਟੁ ਸਚੁ ਰਤਨੀ ਭਰੇ ਭੰਡਾਰ ॥
sachaa saudhaa haT sach ratanee bhare bha(n)ddaar ||
True is the merchandise, and true is the shop; the warehouses are overflowing with jewels.
(Guru Granth Sahib, page 646)
And
ਜੋਤਿ ਰੂਪਿ ਹਰਿ ਆਪਿ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਾਨਕੁ ਕਹਾਯਉ ॥
jot roop har aap guroo naanak kahaayau ||
The Embodiment of Light, the Lord Himself is called Guru Nanak.
ਤਾ ਤੇ ਅੰਗਦੁ ਭਯਉ ਤਤ ਸਿਉ ਤਤੁ ਮਿਲਾਯਉ ॥
taa te a(n)gadh bhayau tat siau tat milaayau ||
From Him, came Guru Angad; His essence was absorbed into the essence.
(Guru Granth Sahib, page 1408)
Bhai Nand Lal Granthawali (Singh, Ganda) quotes Guru Gobind Singh Ji emphasizing that all the Gurus being the same, explained through Atmak Jote ideology.
Mr Khaira’s final comments relate to Prabhsharandeep Singh’s derogatory and slanderous language criticizing Ajmer Singh in a video discussion posted on his Facebook account (California Sikh Youth Alliance). This was ‘conduct unbecoming’ of an educated man, stoking up suspicion, division and hostility. This was simply a character assassination of an absolute gentleman, scholar and author of exceptional quality to whom the Sikh nation owes a huge sense of gratitude. Ajmer Singh has had an interesting life, details of which he has candidly discussed/disclosed on various occasions to explain his thought process. This level of honesty and his gentle demeanor is reflective of a Gurmukh.
My discussion will start with a couple of positive aspects from the Religion and the Specter of the West book: –
- Acknowledgement of the good work of Singh Sabha as it “locates the origin of Sikhism in Nanak’s revelatory communication with God and in the qualitative elevation of this mystical experience above the Hindu/Bhagti religions”. This essentially “constitutes a break” with Hinduism from that point (page 255).
- On page 258, questions why academics did not pursue research into hermeneutics or “Sikh theology” since McLeod’s “Guru Nanak and the Sikh Religion” publication in 1968? The Sikh authorities and academia should have ‘grasped the nettle’ and dealt with the challenge posed by McLeod’s publication. Contemporary interest and activity in Sikh studies is on an upward trajectory in western universities, albeit with questionable motivations.
I found the rest of the commentary very saddening, having met and known most of these people. Initial assessment was that of difference of opinion amongst academic people but I find the whole thing is a sociocultural and political battle-field (Singh, Sikander). The inevitable question has to be, how and why have we reached this impasse?
Qazi Noor Mohhamad in his book Jungnama, complimented Sikhs as “these dogs don’t lie” despite tremendous animosity during the Mughal era. However, in current times the Sikhs are the subject of overwhelming negativity and any praise is directed towards those accepting the assimilation process. That is to say, we are urged to practice faith within state defined boundaries without any challenge to the state or expression of alternative politics. This state policy has had a negative psychological impact on Sikh way of life, resulting in a gradual dilution of our ethical code (Rehat). Consequential poor morale and role modeling for younger generations has led to confusion and departure from our traditional values.
A critical appraisal of Sikh lives in the UK is based less on ethos or essence of faith but more on sociology of religion with increasing level of ritualism. With only a limited understanding of Gurbani and/or “Rehat” it is literally, “blind leading the blind”. The Gurdwaras resemble commercial organizations without the necessary attention and/or adherence to primary objectives of “nurturing the mind”. Jathedar Harpreet Singh has tried to ‘comfort’ and steady the people by referencing “Sikh journey of survival through far worse times”. He also declared that, “Akal Takht is not just a building, it is the heartbeat of the Sikh nation”. In that spirit it is incumbent for the Akal Takht to instruct the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) to strengthen and overall the education provision. Instead of complaining about Hindutva organizations ‘stealing the march’, the SGPC should be establishing a parallel academic research system to match. Until such an ambitious programme comes to fruition, it falls to individuals to develop their own interest, direction and study plans to preserve the authenticity of our heritage. If we don’t wake up and act with vigour, then the bitterness and guilt will be ours to suffer in this life and future reincarnations.
References:
California Sikh Youth Alliance (2020) State of the Stateless; Commemorating 1984 June attack
https://m.facebook.com/CaliforniaSikhYouthAlliance?
Conference Report: After 1984
Retrieved 25 July 2020
Dhillon, Gurdarshan Singh (2014) Critique of Western Writings on Sikh Religion and History (Chandigarh)
Dhillon, Gurdarshan Singh (2020) Prabhsharandeep Singh & Arvindpal Mandair’s thinking is dangerous for sentiments of the Sikh Panth: For debate (Punjab Times 2 July 2020, page 28 Derby UK)
Guru Granth Sahib Ji
Khaira, Mohinder Singh (2020) “Let the gold ‘perish’ if it damages the ears”: A metaphor (Punjab Times 9 July 2020, page 32 Derby UK)
Singh, Ajmer (2018) Knowledge, Ego and Spirituality (Youtube)
Retrieved 6 August 2020
Singh, Ganda () Bhai Nand Lal Granthawali (Publication Bureau, Panjabi University, Patiala) Pages 164-165.
Singh, Gurtej (2002) Singhnad (Panjabi book, Chandigarh)
Singh, Kharak & Kaur, Gurnam (2015) Blasphemous Attacks (Institute of Sikh Studies)
http://sikhinstitute.org/jan_2015/5-kharaksingh.html
Singh, Pashaura (2000) The Guru Granth Sahib, Canon, Meaning & Authority (Oxford University Press)
Singh, Sikander Dr. (2020) Bipar Sanskar Explained; Discussion hosted by Samvad (Sikh Siyasat) broadcast live on internet, 7 June 2020
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=cNkUl5EnlUw
UC Berkeley Sikh Student Association releases letter in opposition to proposed endowment
Retrieved 25 July 2020
Open letter by UC Berkeley Sikh Students Association (2019)
Retrieved 25 July 2020
Letter to Dr Timothy White, Chancellor of University of California Riverside from Members of Coalition and Watchdog Agency published in World Sikh News (2009)
Retrieved 30 July 2020
Khalsa Diary 