TheSikhRenaissance
SPNer
- Nov 7, 2020
- 47
- 8
This article is in regards to certain controversial statements made by individuals claiming Sikh origins on social media in the recent few weeks.
Combustion:
In the early 2000’s controversial Sikh intellectual Gurbaksh Singh Kala Afghana published a loaded comment,
“Neither the Khanda (cleaver) nor the Bata (bowl) make one a Khalsa, it is only Gurbani which retains the prerogative to make one the Khalsa…”
Given Singh’s anti-Dasam Granth/Sampradaic stance, it was no wonder that his words were inimically misinterpreted by his detractors to ignite controversy which witnessed total chaos across the Sikh world. Common sense, as one observer noted, had truly extended its vacation with regards to the Sikhs. Later, with the spread of Afghana’s books among the mainstream, it became evident that the man had a valid point. Falsely accused of molestation and even political treachery at one point in his life, Gurbaksh Singh is only now receiving his dues two years after his demise. Hounded by the self-proclaimed Sikh clergy at the Akal Takhat while alive, he nonetheless continued his intellectual battle against what he deemed to be the Pujari infiltration within Sikhi until his last breath. So what was it about his perception of Amrit which earned him his share of infamy?
Amrit vs. Amrit:
As a concept, Amrit is ubiquitous in Indic lore. But contrary to the modern Sanataan school which ignores all antecedents to impose itself as some parental umbrella of other faiths, its conceptual definition varies across the spectrum. In Vedic lore it is an ambrosial liquor which bestows divine powers and is the fount of all immortality. The forced osmosis of Jainism with proto-Vedism evolved this understanding into a concept which held that renunciation was true Amrit as it dispelled the illusion of false Amrit which is Creation.
Buddhism proposed that Amrit was an internal process via which mental equilibrium was acquired and connective action nullified. Connective in the sense that both good and bad attached one to the world which was the fount of all misery. The further sundering of Buddhism on regional grounds lent further dimension to the conceptual evolution of Amrit. In Chinese Buddhism Amrit emerged as a consumable sanctified by religious mantras. In Tibetan Buddhism, Amrit was accepted to be any consumable with restorative properties.
Nanak:
To convey the Sikh ethos to otherwise non-Sikh masses, Guru Nanak adopted prevalent terms and redefined them in the context of his broader philosophy. As illustrated above, the concept of Amrit by the time of Guru Nanak’s birth was figurative for renunciation. The Guru, in line with his established practice, revamped its meaning. This new definition was preserved by his successors.
ਗੁਰ ਕਾ ਸਬਦੁ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤੁ ਹੈ ਜਿਤੁ ਪੀਤੈ ਤਿਖ ਜਾਇ ॥
“The instruction of the Guru (emanating from the truth) is the ambrosia (Amrit) partaking of which all thirst is quenched.”
-Guru Granth, 35.
What was the attraction of this new Amrit?
ਗੁਰਿ ਪੂਰੈ ਸਭੁ ਪੂਰਾ ਕੀਆ ॥ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਨਾਮੁ ਰਿਦ ਮਹਿ ਦੀਆ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
“The perfect Guru has made the human life purposeful by attaching it to the truth. The Guru has done this by planting truth within the mind. Now wisdom and virtue pervade the heart.”
-Guru Granth, 1184.
Life:
The Sikh life is one in which the Amrit of human intelligence is paramount. This Sikh ambrosia is not second party i.e. it is received from any exterior source. The physical Guru (Guru Nanak-Guru Granth) posits one on the path to discover it within themselves. It cannot be unlocked through either meditation or alluding Creation to be false. To partake of this ambrosia one requires a purposeful life in which virtue is cultivated and then utilized to better oneself and the world.
ਪੀਊ ਦਾਦੇ ਕਾ ਖੋਲਿ ਡਿਠਾ ਖਜਾਨਾ ॥
ਤਾ ਮੇਰੈ ਮਨਿ ਭਇਆ ਨਿਧਾਨਾ ॥੧॥
ਰਤਨ ਲਾਲ ਜਾ ਕਾ ਕਛੂ ਨ ਮੋਲੁ ॥
ਭਰੇ ਭੰਡਾਰ ਅਖੂਟ ਅਤੋਲ ॥੨॥
ਖਾਵਹਿ ਖਰਚਹਿ ਰਲਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਭਾਈ ॥
ਤੋਟਿ ਨ ਆਵੈ ਵਧਦੋ ਜਾਈ ॥੩॥
ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਸੁ ਮਸਤਕਿ ਲੇਖੁ ਲਿਖਾਇ ॥
ਸੁ ਏਤੁ ਖਜਾਨੈ ਲਇਆ ਰਲਾਇ ॥੪॥੩੧॥੧੦੦॥
“The ancestral treasure trove of humanity, upon opening it my mind found perpetual solace. Within it I discovered countless, precious jewels. It is such a trove which is forever full. Gather and partake of it as you will. Add to it, take from it there is no debt incurred. Nanak says that they who make their own destiny worthy, they receive the keys to this treasure.”
-Guru Granth, 186.
And,
ਮਤਿ ਵਿਚਿ ਰਤਨ ਜਵਾਹਰ ਮਾਣਿਕ ਜੇ ਇਕ ਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਸਿਖ ਸੁਣੀ ॥
“Within the (human) intellect there are priceless jewels, these can only be acquired if the Sikh heeds the Guru’s instructions.”
-Guru Granth, 2.
1698:
In light of the above, how are the events of 1698 in which Guru Gobind Singh initiated the practice of Khande Bate Da Amrit to be interpreted? It should be remembered that contrary to the current Postmodernist/Sanataan narrative, Guru Nanak was never an ultra-orthodox pacifist in the same vein as the Vedic religiosity. He established the foundations of an unique lifestyle in which dignity and virtue were to be used to contribute towards the progress of Creation. While a plethora of inter-contradictory texts exist arguing that prior to 1698 the practice of initiation into Sikhi consisted of an acolyte drinking water in which the incumbent Guru’s feet were washed, this does not seem viable in the light of Gurbani. The Gurus by no means were attaching Sikhs with themselves but orienting them towards the path of truth. It is probable that the early Sikh initiation consisted of an acolyte retaining unshorn hair and publicly being confirmed as a Sikh after forfeiting their ancestral faith.
The emphasis placed by the progenitor Guru on resistance to tyranny and living a life encumbered by any form of oppression witnessed the Sikhs take up arms to protect themselves under the fifth Guru onwards. In 1698 Guru Gobind Singh created a highly conspicuous ceremony via which to initiate the Sikhs into Sikhi post-Guru era. He took a Khanda (broadsword) and dissolved sugar crystals into a cauldron full of water while stirring with the said Khanda. This symbolized death and when the Sikh partook of the resultant mixture it underscored their acceptance of human mortality and desire to use it to impel change in the worldly paradigm.
Gurbaksh Singh:
So what was it about Gurbaksh Singh’s statement which brought the sky down atop his head? The contentious scholar pointed out the dichotomy between the Gurus’ understanding of Amrit and the current understanding of the issue. For Guru Gobind Singh, keeping in consort with Guru Nanak’s philosophy, the mixture made in the cauldron was not Amrit. It was a semiotic ceremony through which the initiate discarded all forms of orthopraxy and belief in past faiths to conform their pledge to follow the Sikh way of life wholly. Such a Sikh would be the Khalsa-the perfect embodiment of Sikhi. The Khalsa, itself, would be a fraternity forever confronting societal atrophy through its very beliefs.
For Gurbaksh Singh the devil was in the detail. The fact that since the dormancy of the Lahore Singh-Sabha, Sikh Pujaris were promoting that the ceremony alone was divine had hampered the Sikhs at countless turns in their history.
“Neither the Khanda (cleaver) nor the Bata (bowl) make one a Khalsa, it is only Gurbani which retains the prerogative to make one the Khalsa…”
His statement essentially articulated that the ceremony devised by the tenth Guru was not the ends but a means to an ends. Had it been the ends then the institute of Sikh Amrit would have been divine and resistant to abuse. The recent history of the Sikhs, the 80’s which he witnessed, evinced that this was not the case. The Khanda and the Bata were the keys to the true Amrit which lent the ceremony its name. This Amrit was intelligence and could only be partake of through living as per Gurbani.
Rehat:
Gurbaksh Singh left no stone unturned in exposing the allegedly divine Rehats of the Pujari factions. This was misinterpreted by his detractors to argue that he was anti-Rehat. His genuine words, in his books, convey the authenticity of his views which are analogous to Gurbani. Rehat was the simplified discipline which allowed a Sikh to imbibe Gurbani in their life. Its parameters were decided by Gurbani rather than human culturalism.
In Ending:
Quoting Gurbaksh Singh is a controversial act. The man might have died but his legacy continues to confront the Pujari orbit pervading Sikhi today. But in today’s age where unfounded allegations are being made that Guru Nanak was a closet homosexual or statements being made to the effect that {censored} Rehat, maybe it is high time we unearth Gurbaksh Singh’s words and understand them for what they truly are. An explanation of true Sikhi as opposed to Pujari Sikhi and today’s woke neo-Sikhi which would have us alter Gurbani in order to synchronize ourselves with whatever vogue permeates the world’s attention at present.
Combustion:
In the early 2000’s controversial Sikh intellectual Gurbaksh Singh Kala Afghana published a loaded comment,
“Neither the Khanda (cleaver) nor the Bata (bowl) make one a Khalsa, it is only Gurbani which retains the prerogative to make one the Khalsa…”
Given Singh’s anti-Dasam Granth/Sampradaic stance, it was no wonder that his words were inimically misinterpreted by his detractors to ignite controversy which witnessed total chaos across the Sikh world. Common sense, as one observer noted, had truly extended its vacation with regards to the Sikhs. Later, with the spread of Afghana’s books among the mainstream, it became evident that the man had a valid point. Falsely accused of molestation and even political treachery at one point in his life, Gurbaksh Singh is only now receiving his dues two years after his demise. Hounded by the self-proclaimed Sikh clergy at the Akal Takhat while alive, he nonetheless continued his intellectual battle against what he deemed to be the Pujari infiltration within Sikhi until his last breath. So what was it about his perception of Amrit which earned him his share of infamy?
Amrit vs. Amrit:
As a concept, Amrit is ubiquitous in Indic lore. But contrary to the modern Sanataan school which ignores all antecedents to impose itself as some parental umbrella of other faiths, its conceptual definition varies across the spectrum. In Vedic lore it is an ambrosial liquor which bestows divine powers and is the fount of all immortality. The forced osmosis of Jainism with proto-Vedism evolved this understanding into a concept which held that renunciation was true Amrit as it dispelled the illusion of false Amrit which is Creation.
Buddhism proposed that Amrit was an internal process via which mental equilibrium was acquired and connective action nullified. Connective in the sense that both good and bad attached one to the world which was the fount of all misery. The further sundering of Buddhism on regional grounds lent further dimension to the conceptual evolution of Amrit. In Chinese Buddhism Amrit emerged as a consumable sanctified by religious mantras. In Tibetan Buddhism, Amrit was accepted to be any consumable with restorative properties.
Nanak:
To convey the Sikh ethos to otherwise non-Sikh masses, Guru Nanak adopted prevalent terms and redefined them in the context of his broader philosophy. As illustrated above, the concept of Amrit by the time of Guru Nanak’s birth was figurative for renunciation. The Guru, in line with his established practice, revamped its meaning. This new definition was preserved by his successors.
ਗੁਰ ਕਾ ਸਬਦੁ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤੁ ਹੈ ਜਿਤੁ ਪੀਤੈ ਤਿਖ ਜਾਇ ॥
“The instruction of the Guru (emanating from the truth) is the ambrosia (Amrit) partaking of which all thirst is quenched.”
-Guru Granth, 35.
What was the attraction of this new Amrit?
ਗੁਰਿ ਪੂਰੈ ਸਭੁ ਪੂਰਾ ਕੀਆ ॥ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਨਾਮੁ ਰਿਦ ਮਹਿ ਦੀਆ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
“The perfect Guru has made the human life purposeful by attaching it to the truth. The Guru has done this by planting truth within the mind. Now wisdom and virtue pervade the heart.”
-Guru Granth, 1184.
Life:
The Sikh life is one in which the Amrit of human intelligence is paramount. This Sikh ambrosia is not second party i.e. it is received from any exterior source. The physical Guru (Guru Nanak-Guru Granth) posits one on the path to discover it within themselves. It cannot be unlocked through either meditation or alluding Creation to be false. To partake of this ambrosia one requires a purposeful life in which virtue is cultivated and then utilized to better oneself and the world.
ਪੀਊ ਦਾਦੇ ਕਾ ਖੋਲਿ ਡਿਠਾ ਖਜਾਨਾ ॥
ਤਾ ਮੇਰੈ ਮਨਿ ਭਇਆ ਨਿਧਾਨਾ ॥੧॥
ਰਤਨ ਲਾਲ ਜਾ ਕਾ ਕਛੂ ਨ ਮੋਲੁ ॥
ਭਰੇ ਭੰਡਾਰ ਅਖੂਟ ਅਤੋਲ ॥੨॥
ਖਾਵਹਿ ਖਰਚਹਿ ਰਲਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਭਾਈ ॥
ਤੋਟਿ ਨ ਆਵੈ ਵਧਦੋ ਜਾਈ ॥੩॥
ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਜਿਸੁ ਮਸਤਕਿ ਲੇਖੁ ਲਿਖਾਇ ॥
ਸੁ ਏਤੁ ਖਜਾਨੈ ਲਇਆ ਰਲਾਇ ॥੪॥੩੧॥੧੦੦॥
“The ancestral treasure trove of humanity, upon opening it my mind found perpetual solace. Within it I discovered countless, precious jewels. It is such a trove which is forever full. Gather and partake of it as you will. Add to it, take from it there is no debt incurred. Nanak says that they who make their own destiny worthy, they receive the keys to this treasure.”
-Guru Granth, 186.
And,
ਮਤਿ ਵਿਚਿ ਰਤਨ ਜਵਾਹਰ ਮਾਣਿਕ ਜੇ ਇਕ ਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਸਿਖ ਸੁਣੀ ॥
“Within the (human) intellect there are priceless jewels, these can only be acquired if the Sikh heeds the Guru’s instructions.”
-Guru Granth, 2.
1698:
In light of the above, how are the events of 1698 in which Guru Gobind Singh initiated the practice of Khande Bate Da Amrit to be interpreted? It should be remembered that contrary to the current Postmodernist/Sanataan narrative, Guru Nanak was never an ultra-orthodox pacifist in the same vein as the Vedic religiosity. He established the foundations of an unique lifestyle in which dignity and virtue were to be used to contribute towards the progress of Creation. While a plethora of inter-contradictory texts exist arguing that prior to 1698 the practice of initiation into Sikhi consisted of an acolyte drinking water in which the incumbent Guru’s feet were washed, this does not seem viable in the light of Gurbani. The Gurus by no means were attaching Sikhs with themselves but orienting them towards the path of truth. It is probable that the early Sikh initiation consisted of an acolyte retaining unshorn hair and publicly being confirmed as a Sikh after forfeiting their ancestral faith.
The emphasis placed by the progenitor Guru on resistance to tyranny and living a life encumbered by any form of oppression witnessed the Sikhs take up arms to protect themselves under the fifth Guru onwards. In 1698 Guru Gobind Singh created a highly conspicuous ceremony via which to initiate the Sikhs into Sikhi post-Guru era. He took a Khanda (broadsword) and dissolved sugar crystals into a cauldron full of water while stirring with the said Khanda. This symbolized death and when the Sikh partook of the resultant mixture it underscored their acceptance of human mortality and desire to use it to impel change in the worldly paradigm.
Gurbaksh Singh:
So what was it about Gurbaksh Singh’s statement which brought the sky down atop his head? The contentious scholar pointed out the dichotomy between the Gurus’ understanding of Amrit and the current understanding of the issue. For Guru Gobind Singh, keeping in consort with Guru Nanak’s philosophy, the mixture made in the cauldron was not Amrit. It was a semiotic ceremony through which the initiate discarded all forms of orthopraxy and belief in past faiths to conform their pledge to follow the Sikh way of life wholly. Such a Sikh would be the Khalsa-the perfect embodiment of Sikhi. The Khalsa, itself, would be a fraternity forever confronting societal atrophy through its very beliefs.
For Gurbaksh Singh the devil was in the detail. The fact that since the dormancy of the Lahore Singh-Sabha, Sikh Pujaris were promoting that the ceremony alone was divine had hampered the Sikhs at countless turns in their history.
“Neither the Khanda (cleaver) nor the Bata (bowl) make one a Khalsa, it is only Gurbani which retains the prerogative to make one the Khalsa…”
His statement essentially articulated that the ceremony devised by the tenth Guru was not the ends but a means to an ends. Had it been the ends then the institute of Sikh Amrit would have been divine and resistant to abuse. The recent history of the Sikhs, the 80’s which he witnessed, evinced that this was not the case. The Khanda and the Bata were the keys to the true Amrit which lent the ceremony its name. This Amrit was intelligence and could only be partake of through living as per Gurbani.
Rehat:
Gurbaksh Singh left no stone unturned in exposing the allegedly divine Rehats of the Pujari factions. This was misinterpreted by his detractors to argue that he was anti-Rehat. His genuine words, in his books, convey the authenticity of his views which are analogous to Gurbani. Rehat was the simplified discipline which allowed a Sikh to imbibe Gurbani in their life. Its parameters were decided by Gurbani rather than human culturalism.
In Ending:
Quoting Gurbaksh Singh is a controversial act. The man might have died but his legacy continues to confront the Pujari orbit pervading Sikhi today. But in today’s age where unfounded allegations are being made that Guru Nanak was a closet homosexual or statements being made to the effect that {censored} Rehat, maybe it is high time we unearth Gurbaksh Singh’s words and understand them for what they truly are. An explanation of true Sikhi as opposed to Pujari Sikhi and today’s woke neo-Sikhi which would have us alter Gurbani in order to synchronize ourselves with whatever vogue permeates the world’s attention at present.
