This is an attempt to make sense of this contentious subject by Dr. Jagroop Singh, a student of Sikh Studies without funding or conflict of interest.
As 2nd and 3rd generation immigrants from the Indian subcontinent, we have had only limited exposure to our history. Parents have been largely ‘silent’ and even reluctant on details, particularly around some of the gruesome chapters. In trying to survive in this country, we have faced the tension between assimilation versus the preservation of our identity and history. The Indian connection, however tenuous, still persists with family and emotional ties. Despite the time lapse and significant ‘distance’, we hope and pray for our home country to thrive on all fronts.
There are complexities in maintaining duel identities imposed upon us by intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Lack of reading and discussion forums and the limited coverage of Indian topics impacts on both interest and knowledge transfer. The emergence of community TV channels and social media can be helpful but are not without challenges of distortion and misunderstandings. Parents and their offspring are in a difficult situation of a knowledge and generational gap, which thwarts interest in trying to understand our past. This prose is an attempt to aid understanding of the quagmire of Indian politics.
Indian Constitution
The slow and arduous process of constructing the Indian constitution took place over 10-12 years. The Indian National Congress made an official demand for an elected Constituent Assembly to frame the Constitution of India in 1935. At that juncture, the British authorities were insistent on giving weight to minority populations. They were keen to offer some ‘ownership’ of the due process between 1940-46. The laudable consideration for minority populations proved to be a token gesture as the Hindutva’s contrived and persuasive strategy established their numerical advantage and continue to do so. The Congress managed a majority of 208 with the Muslim League only securing 73 out of 296 seats assigned to the provinces. This led to a period of non co-operation and later, a complete breakdown in relations between the two. All this culminated in the Indian Independence Act 1947 and the ‘birth’ of India and Pakistan as separate nations.
Upon India’s independence on 15 August 1947, the new Congress led government invited Bhimrao Ramji Ambedkar to serve as the first Law Minister. Soon after, he was appointed as the Chairman of the Constitution Drafting Committee. However, the credibility of Ambedkar was undermined by the more powerful, Vallabhbhai Patel (Home Minister) as he “piloted some of the most important parts of the Constitution”. Ambedkar resigned from the cabinet in 1951 over the many restrictive conditions placed upon him, particularly ‘the Hindu code bills’. Although initially preserved under the British colonial rule, they were formally passed in the form of the Hindu Marriage Act, Hindu Succession Act, Hindu Minority Act and Hindu Adoptions and Maintenance Act. These Acts gave an expansive jurisdiction to the Hindu majority and these continue to be controversial to the present day among women, other religious and nationalist groups. This has become an obstacle in the delivery of justice, equality and liberty for the ordinary citizen by the supposed, ‘secular and socialist’ constitution.
India’s dominant caste parties, Congress and the BJP, carefully hide the Ambedkar’s criticism and disappointment from public gaze. Bhim Rao Ambedkar had aimed to free his people from the talons of Hindu caste system but became frustrated and trapped by Gandhi’s “emotional blackmail”. In retrospect, the Indian Constitution was perhaps the best of Ambedkar’s works. The constitution is based on the British model without sufficient attention to the Indian philosophical ethos or the mode of functionality. A cynical view is that the constitution construct was deliberately left open with 126 amendments presented to Parliament in 70 years. The ‘imperfections’ have been replaced by preconceived changes thus facilitating the formation of Hindu Rashtar. On 12 May 2020, PM Modi began the latest initiative, the “Atma Nirbhar Bharat” 3.0, making India self-reliant in the Covid era. Within a year of that declaration, India’s handling of the 2nd wave has become a case of international embarrassment.
The word secular was developed in the context of European history to separate the Church from the state affairs. Its use in the Indian constitution is more akin to ‘equity of religions’ thereby reducing the undue dominance of Hindus. It is fair to say that secularism has been a slippery concept/phrase and has haunted the Hindutva philosophy. So much so that its usage is considered impolite by some and offensive to others. To redress the balance, Manusimriti is being promoted into the political discourse at every opportunity. Yogi Adityanath (Chief Minister of U.P.) is explicitly expressing opinions against ethnic minorities and advising them to fall in line with the Hindu Rashtryia ideology. Similarly, Pravin Togadia (former President of Vishva Hindu Parishad) speaking at a partisan rally advocated the replacement of the secular terminology of the constitution with Bharat Hindu Republic. He makes numerous points in achieving this Hindu Nation State: –
- Maintain the “Bauhmat” (majority) status of Hindus
- Any Muslim having more than 2 children will lose government support
- No ration card
- No school place
- No medical assistance
- No financial loans
- No government jobs
- Even, potential loss of citizenship rights
- Bharat ki Sarkar to consist of Hindus only, thereby negating need for political parties
- Defense, Education, Law & Civil Administration will be a privileged occupations for only Hindus
Manusmriti
The origin of Manusmriti is attributed to Brahma, the creator? Thereon, it was passed on to an archetypal figure, Manu. He goes on to pass it to the first teacher, Bhrigu and thereafter, on to other Rishis (sages). It was composed roughly around 200 AD and is seen as the foremost Dharma-Shastra, overshadowing all other law books. This ingeniously constructed composition gave rights to the Brahmins of statecraft and political rule. Therefore it is reasonable to say, Manusmriti is a code of conduct put together ‘by Brahmins for Brahmins’ to consolidate their status in the upper echelons of society. Shudar caste people were prohibited to learn Sanskrit, as this was the exclusive preserve of the Brahmins, as the chosen people?
However, the Muslim invaders were the rulers of India for almost a millennium until the 2 centuries of ‘colonial era’ by the East India Company. The Company conveniently resurrected the Manusmriti as the Hindu law book in competition to the Muslim Sharia, as a “divide and rule” tactic. In the pre and post independence period, the Hindus exploited the masses, using communal politics to realize its “vote bank” potential.
It is worth noting that this convenient and grandiose elevation of Brahmins above the other three classes of people is highly contested. Despite all this, the Hindutva have always managed to get the upper hand by using clever electoral strategies. Moves are currently afoot to promote this mythical Manusmriti as the future Indian national constitution. Leading Hindutva figures like Yogi Adityanath and Praveen Todadia are openly making an inevitable case.
In contrast, Guru Nanak and all subsequent Gurus were fundamentally opposed the Manusmriti code thus making this change unpalatable for the orthodox Sikhs. The secular constitutional principles initially offered some safeguards for ethnic minorities, which disappeared with changes of attitude and subsequent amendments. Clever slogans like “Sikhs and Hindus belong to each other” and “Khalsa was created to protect Hindus” are designed to assist the ‘assimilation’ process and negating any philosophical opposition.
2 case studies of differential treatment
A Panjabi poet Diwan Singh Kalepani participated in the Indian freedom movement prominently based on non-cooperation. He served in the Medical Corps of the Indian Army in Rangoon (British Burma) before his transfer to the Andaman Islands in 1927. He was an active member of the local Gurdwara, frequently reciting his deep ‘free verse’ poems philosophically aligned to Sikh ideology. Interestingly, these poems were posthumously published as unique archive. Even though he was a critic of British occupation he refused to become an instrument in the Japanese propaganda against the colonial power as a matter of principle. The main objection cited is the systematic rape and ill treatment of women by the Japanese. This resulted in horrific executions of Diwan Singh and the associated congregation for their objections and noncompliance. In 1987, the Lok Sabha declared Diwan Singh a martyr to be celebrated. However, with the recent rise of Hinduvta, he is now a forgotten hero (Tuli, 2017).
It needs to be noted that the British authorities were also poor at tolerating legitimacy of independence activists with incredible incarceration and executions. The Sikhs pursued the cause for independence with the utmost vigour, accounting for 81% life terms in Kalepani (2147/2646) and 76% of hangings (93/121). These exceptional Sikh sacrifices are ignored unless they can be used for political gain. The Sikhs and other minority populations have become subjects of negativity and revile. PM Modi described the protesting farmers as “Parjeevi” (equivalent of a Dung beetle), is a case in point.
Vinayak Damodar Savarkar was arrested in 1910, whilst studying in England and extradited to India. He was sentenced to 2 life terms in jail for seditious activity against the colonial rule in India. In contrast to Diwan Singh, a clever and cunning campaign was instigated on his behalf for a pardon as soon as he was moved to Cellular Jail in Andaman Island. The speed was such that the 1st petition for clemency was filed after only one month, dated 30 August 1911. The 2nd petition was presented 2 years later in which he describes himself as a “prodigal son” longing to return to the “parental doors of the government”. He, also added that “my conversion to the constitutional line would bring back all those misled young men in India and abroad who were once looking up to me as their guide. I am ready to serve the government in any capacity they like, for as my conversion is conscientious so I hope my future conduct would be. By keeping me in jail, nothing can be got in comparison to what would be otherwise.” Further petitions for clemency in 1917 & 1920, involved unparalleled groveling were unsuccessful. In 1921, the Indian National Congress leadership demanded unconditional release by endorsing the remorse and reformation of Savarkar’s character. This led to a transfer to a jail in Ratnagiri (Maharashtra), were he wrote the most influential theorization, “Essentials of Hindutva”.
In 1924 the colonial authorities interned him in a bungalow in the Ratnagiri district with visiting rights. This situation of a ‘house arrest’ continued till 1937 after which he became active in opposing the Congress, launching “Quit India” movement by 1942. As champion of a Hindu Rashtar, the appeasement strategy of Muslims was seen as a tragic. The subsequent partition and formation of Pakistan led to his part in the conspiracy to assassinate Mahatma Gandhi in 1948. Although, acquitted by the court for insufficient evidence he continued to operate ‘under the radar’ addressing social and cultural elements of Hindutva until his death in 1966.
Bhartiya Janata Party coming into power in 1998 and 2014 presented an opportunity to revive Savarkar’s fascist ideology. The political expedience of using a historical ‘Hindutva figure’ has mass appeal and offering ample justification for the ensuing BJP agenda. His views were derived from Nazi Germany’s treatment of Jews, which were to be replicated in India against the Muslim population.
The above cases serve to illustrate a difference in the mindset &/or character between the two communities. The Hindu ideology is littered with examples of selfish cleverness and slippery morals to achieve their desired goals (Gurtej Singh). The Sikh ideology is demonstrative of simple belief, commitment and sacrifice. Mr. Savarkar ‘wormed’ his way out of Kalepani jail whilst still ‘inwardly’, continuing his mission of a Hindu Rashtar. The naivety and leniency of the British authorities together with the ‘divide and rule’ policy, could be seen both as a conspiracy & complicity? The Cellular Jail is now a museum containing ample references to Vinayak Damodar Savarkar and absolutely none of Diwan Singh. The removal of his portrait is a case of ‘whitewashing’ history and contravening a parliament ruling.
Hindutva believe that the curse of being a Shudar is permanent scar and therefore cannot be erased, even if they changed their religion to Budhist, Sikh, Christian or Islam. Gandhi had labeled Sikhs as quarrelsome, vandals, drunkards and even showed his distaste towards the beards and Kirpans. Whilst tarnishing the community image of Sikhs, they have also been conveniently described as the “improved version of Hindus”, in terms of their courage and military prowess. Propagating the role Khalsa as the protectorate of the Hindu nation and creating a false genealogical linkage through the mythical Bachitar Natak is an ingenious, idea, albeit a ludicrous one.
Sikhism
A major aim of this religion is the consciousness of the Ego and how to control or change its affect upon individual kirdar (behaviour). This has led some people to think exclusively of Naam simran and meditation as the only purpose of this religion. The Miri Piri is an intertwined concept of the spiritual and the political was a necessity, is often overlooked. The concept is also inextricably linked with the Akaal Takht Sahib but is being distorted to represent radicalism within the Panth. The Miri concept could and should be seen as the liberation of a caste divided people in challenging the status quo of the abusive political regime. This culminated in the evolution of the Khalsa from the Nanak Panth under the auspices of Guru Gobind Singh Ji. This was the divine mission of all 10 Gurus over a time span of 230 years. An eyewitness spy of the Emperor Aurangzeb, Ahmed Shah Batalvi, confirms the traditional account of Vaisakhi of 1699. He confirms the sermon following the ordination, emphasizing love, respect and equality framework within the Khalsa fraternity, leaving behind the superstitions of a caste-ridden society. The key points discussed can be substantiated by numerous quotations from the Guru Granth Sahib Ji and ‘pooratan’ Granths written in that era: –
“Humoo Guru Gobind Singh, Humoo Nanak Ust” (Bhai Nand Lal Ji)
They are both of the same “Jote”
“Shudron ko Sardar banayo, Raj karn ki reet Sikhaon, tabeh Gobind Singh naam kahaoon” (Gurbilas Patshahi Daswin)
Gobind Singh Ji transformed the weak & meek to rule as Sardaars (gentlemen)
The incorporation of lower castes into Sikhism contravened the divisive practice of the caste system. The negation of this coveted tenet of Manusimriti threatened the Brahmanical dominance. Therefore, the Sikh code is an unacceptable proposition and remains a ‘thorn’ in the Hindu psyche. Bhimrao Ambedkar famously said that the only liberation from the Brahmanical code was to follow the Guru Granth Sahib.
Final thoughts
History proves the deceptions Sikh people have endured and the legitimate grievances they harbour. However, the reality of a Sikh state is ‘pie in the sky’ stuff and Nehru’s post-independence commentary that, “the circumstances have now changed” is absolutely true. In the circumstances that we find ourselves, it is back to basics of “kirt karo, Naam japo te vund shako”. Our ‘Rehat’ (conduct and character) needs to be philosophically aligned to the Guru Granth Sahib. It is necessary to rescue our key institutional and develop some of those performing below par. Accountable and smart leadership, hitherto absent needs to be put into place that works to Panthic agenda above personal gain.
A lot of people will be disappointed to read this conclusion but so far we have only hit our heads on a ‘brick wall’. Take a look around at yourselves, your family and local community and evaluate our knowledge, skills and attitudes for self-governance. Poor management and constant infighting over elections within Gurdwaras paint a dark picture. The scramble for officialdom is greater than that for Sewa (service) providers, excluding opposition party members. The design of Gurdwaras, do not lend themselves to delivering quality education and training. Most people are ‘turned off’ and stay away from Gurdwaras, only attending mandatory functions.
A long journey awaits and we have to believe that good times will come with Guru’s blessing. That is conditional upon ‘walking the righteous path’ with patience and commitment to Sikh conscientiousness.
Reference
Battaglia, Gino (2017) Neo-Hindu Fundamentalist Challenging the Secular and Pluralistic Indian State (Academic.edu)
Desai, D. A. (1988) Framing of India’s Constitution: Contribution of Sardar Patel (Journal of Indian Law Institute, Vol. 30 No. 1)
Pattanaik, Devdutt (2017) What exactly is the Manusmriti? (Dailyo.in) 1 February 2017, retrieved 18 June 2021
Khaira, Mohinder Singh (2021) Comparative analysis of Panth and Manusimriti (Panjab Times UK, 29 April 2021) Page 37
Sikh Missionary College da Mas Patter of August 2006
Singh, Gurtej (2021) All garbage is gathered in the colourful fields (Facebook post) 27 June 2021
Tuli, Pritpal Singh (2017) The Mighty Sikhs; the Sikhs who reversed the tides of History and shaped India (Tuli, page 78 & 94)
Khalsa Diary 