Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana - A Debate

[Harjas Kaur Khalsa]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

YouTube - Sikh Reformer Kala Afghana | Vision TV | May 9, 2007

In his own words... after excommunication he still goes to Gurdwara. He is saying Gurbani is a lie when he says, "Guru Nanak Dev Ji "doesn't know."

What more proof? He is an apostate.

 

[Inder singh]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

Scholars like Dr Pannu and Mr Lamba are well versed in Braj bhasha and persian.Kala afghana is 8 standdard in Urdu.How could he study dsam granth to passa commentary on that.

We have two Birs anandpuri Bir and patna bir of Dasam Granth written in 18th century.How can one say that it is not authentic.Panth ahs alraedy decided and settled these controversies long time ago.See sodhak committee report of 1897.

If not satisfied come out of sikhism and form your own sect.Dasam granth is here to stay.

If you feel that he did not write anything wrong,read HUm Hindu hain by Ex RSS chief Rajinder,you will find sarcastic remarks about sikh scritures copied from there.So kala afghana is front man of Indian agencies and RSS.

 

[pk70]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

Inder Singh ji

Kala Afgana, Ghaga, Spokesman and others are well exposed to Sikh Sangat. Recently Spokesman called his paper Guru Nanak's paper. They are trying desparately to divide Sikhs on any issue they come up with.

 

[Archived_Member1]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

They are trying desparately to divide Sikhs on any issue they come up with.

see, we agree on something again. i'm not so bad, really.

 

[spnadmin]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

Jios,

This is complicated stuff!!! Kala Afghana appears to be neither asking questions nor preaching. He is not asking questions as in posing statements ending with a question mark ???? in hopes of getting answers. Does he really want answers? Nor does he appear to be preaching. He does appear to be testomg deeply held beliefs, which may or may not be supportable in Bani. In other words, he may be looking for a debate (or maybe looking for a fight?). Since the list is longer than 5 questions, Mr. Afghana has been hard at work for a long time. And the information out there is so deeply vested in one side of the argument or the other, that objective analysis -- what's that?

The only "list" I could find was in Wikipedia (believe it or not). Everything else was opinion. Here is the list.

Kala Afghana's (KA) views on different issues (taken from 'Bipran ki Reet to Sach da Marg')

• Bhog & Guru Granth Sahib: Doing bhog of Deg in presence of Guru Granth Sahib is manmat according to KA.
• Sri Amritsar Ishnan: KA states that the holy water of the sarovar should NOT be referred to as Amrit.
• Washing our Feet: KA criticizes the practice of washing our feet before entering Darbar Sahib or our Gurduara Sahibs.
• Amrit Vela: KA states how can you call a particular time of the day Amrit-Vela when so many evil things happen around the world at that time.
• Bhai Veer Singh Ji: KA criticizes Bhai Veer Singh Ji for making anti-Gurmat statements expresses disappointment about his works.
• Bhai Veer Singh Ji, Baba Sri Chand Ji: KA accuses Bhai Veer Singh Ji of lying about Baba Sri Chand Ji, and refers to such writers as "Sikhi day Vayree" (enemies of the Sikhs).
• Amritsar Sarovar: KA implies that there is no basis behind the belief that partaking ishnan in Amritsar sarovar will wash away one's sins. He states that it has nothing to do whatsoever with the Gurbani verse : "RamDaas Sarova Natai || Sabh Utray Pap Kamatai||
• Baba Deep Singh Ji's memorial: KA argues against the need for a memorial for Baba Deep Singh Ji where Baba Ji's severed was laid to rest. He refers to this as idol worship. He questions even whether Baba Ji's severed head had fell at that particular place.
• Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit: KA questions the historical reference that (1)Amrit could revive the dead (the Panj Piarays).(2)Amrit could rid one of previous sins.(3)He states that this kind of belief will convince an Amritdharee to committ further sins.(4)He states that Guru Gobind Singh Ji never accepted the Panj as his Guru (Appay Guru Chella)(5)KA states that the reference to Guru Gobind Singh of reviving the Panj Piyarays after cutting their "sees" are pure lies.
• Baba Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale: KA states that Baba Jarnail Singh Ji committed acts that brought about the current downfall of the Panth. Baba Jarnail Singh Ji desecrated Sri Darbar Sahib when defended and fortified it. By giving shastars and motorcycles to the Sikh youth, he (Baba Jarnail Singh) made us into murderers and robbers (dakoos). KA states that even after Baba Harnam Singh also joined in, their Panthic wishes were never fullfilled. He questions their sincerity and wonders if they were are all "bhekhee" (charlatans).
• Khanday-Batay da Amrit & Sweet Pittasay: KA states that to consider that sweet Pittasay were to be used in preparation of Amrit is a maha-Paap (enormous sin) since it implies that : (1) Dasam Patshah must have understood Naam-Amrit to be bitter. (2) Dasam Patshah had forgotten the Pittasay and his mistake was corrected by Mata Jito Jee. States that this Pittasay eposide is a myth and was made up by the enemies of this faith.
• Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & 3 Banees of Dasam Patshah: KA ridicules reference to Jaap Sahib, Swaiyay, and Chaupai Sahib as Banees recited during Amrit-Sanchar.
• Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & 5 Banees: KA states only the Banees in Guru Granth Sahib were part of the Amrit-Sanchar ceremony. To consider that other three (Jaap Sahib, Swaiyay, and Chaupai Sahib as Banees) were read by the Guru Gobind Singh Ji is utterly direspectful to our SatGurus.
• Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & reviving of the Panj Piyaray & Shakti: KA ridicules the concept of Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & reviving of the Panj Piaray & the divine powers (Shakti) of Amrit. He also referrs to Amrit-dharees as "Papian di Santaan" (offspring of sinners)
• Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & Patits: KA states that was responsible for making Sikh children cut their Kes, smoke tobacco, and become Patits. States that for Sikhs, becoming a Singh is a "bharm" (superstition) of the mind. He also states that those who consider Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit as becoming "Guru-waley" (inititation into Sikhism) are mistaken.
• Amrit & Naam: KA states that calling Amrit Naam is BrahmanVaad.
• Jao Tao Premo Khellan… & Baba Deep Singh: KA ridicules the use of this tuk in reference to Baba Deep Singh deed of fighting with his sis on his palm.
• Adultery & Bhai Randhir Singh: KA states that Bhai Randhir Singh Ji wrote that Adultery was allowed in the Rahit.
• Charan-Amrit: KA ridicules that Sikh tradition of Charan-Amrit that existed until Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit replaced it in 1699. He refers to it as a Brahmanic ritual.
• Panj Piaray & Guru Gobind Singh Ji: He states that Guru Gobind Singh Ji never accepted the Panj as his Guru (Appay Guru Chella)
• Panj Piaray & Amritdharis: KA ridicules Panj Piaray & Amritdharis, tells story of a man who was so fed up with Amritdharis that he cut his Kes and never kept them again.
• Anand-Karj: He ridicules the Panth Parvan Anand-Karj Ceremony. Lables the Anand Maryada as based on Brahmanic Rituals.
• Bhai Randhir Singh: Labels Bhai Randhir Singh as a "Bipree Agent" (an agent of the Brahmans)
• Bhai Randhir Singh, Bhindranwale & others: Ridicules Bhai Randhir Singh, Bhindranwale, and other Mahapurakhs for having belief in Chitar-Gupt, Dharam-Raaj, Jums, Narak/Surag, and the afterworld.
• Khanday-Batay, Amrit & Mantar: States that the water put in a sarovar or bowl (Khanday-Batay) can never be called Amrit. Nor can anyone blow any Mantar (WaheGuru) in water and turn it into anything powerful (Amrit). He credits the Brahmans for creating such a belief.

Whatever his deficiencies as a human being, Mr. Afghana has a talent for stirring the pot. That could be one reason why so many are antagonized by his behavior. I myself cannot tell if he is just looking for a fight, or actually wants to have a reciprocal exchange of views. And he doesn't have much patience with Hindus. So are his test questions sincere or not? Can a reasonably objective person be blamed for being suspicious if he/she can't tell if Mr. Afghana is testing established beliefs to get closer to the "truth" (with a small t) as he sees it, or is simply out to enjoy the thrill of target practice?

 

[pk70]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

aad0002 ji

The person who is interested in check in the truth policy doesnt go against any one personally. He/she must support the allegations with solid proof otherwise hearsay or self declaration turns into mere slander. KA, due to his own personal problems, disqualifies himself to question others if they are Sikhs.

 

[spnadmin]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

pk70 ji

You lost me. I don't even think KA's efforts were worth making. If a Sikh was completely unaware that this controversy was taking place, would it change anything in terms of that individual Sikh's personal belief, spiritual practice or genuine devotion? Better yet, if I agree that every single one of KA's test questions is worth asking, why doesn't that really change my overall commitment to Sikhism? Nothing he says changes anything in a fundamental way. What I am saying is that KA is either a crackpot who believes in himself, or he is just shooting off his mouth. And then the controversy got so hot, he couldn't back out gracefully, so he just decided to crawl out as far as he could on the tree limb. And...

Someone else should finish my thought for me here. :roll:

 

[pk70]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

aad0002 ji

Actually in a way, you are right; however, I give him liberty to debate but with a proof which he lacks. Other point is, how one can question others if one is already in a mess? He attacks Bhai Randhir Singh, right? How can he justify his stand with well known congressi Joginder Singh Spokesman? They all use each other, it comes down to money, money!

 

[spnadmin]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

aad0002 ji

Actually in a way, you are right; however, I give him liberty to debate but with a proof which he lacks. Other point is, how one can question others if one is already in a mess? He attacks Bhai Randhir Singh, right? How can he justify his stand with well known congressi Joginder Singh Spokesman? They all use each other, it comes down to money, money!

It always comes down to money.

I have to go to bed. But this has been good conversation.

 

[pk70]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

see, we agree on something again. i'm not so bad, really.

Thanks Jasleen Kaur ji You are not/was not bad ever !

 

[Randip Singh]

Re: Allagation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

so you follow who... guggha? the spokesman? some missionary organization? they all say the same things...

they try to appeal to intellectuals with their rational sounding arguments. heck, even i find some of those arguments convincing. but in their quest for logic, they seem to have forgotten "faith". i have faith in my Guru, i have faith in God. i even have faith in the Panj Piyare who act as Guru when they distribute Amrit. i believe in the bani of the tenth master. i believe the vaaran of bhai Gurdas Ji. i believe in the janam sakhis. it hurts me when some "logical" person tells me my Guru fainted under torture (as Guggha says of Guru Arjan Sahib). it hurts me when some "logical" person tells me that jaap sahib, chaupai sahib, sawyai, and parts of Rehras sahib are not actually gurbani.
if we stick to "logic", how long will it be before they decide having long hair is illogical and therefore we should all cut it? if they think the bani of the tenth master is not gurbani, how long till they dismiss the banis of the bhagats and bhatts (oh wait, they already have!).

religion and science are two separate things. my faith in God goes beyond logic because my Guru tells me God is capable of anything, and no matter how much i try, i can never understand the full extent of God.

yes, when people say thing that are so against my faith, it's easy to begin to dislike them and all that they stand for, as well as their words. i think that is true for many Sikhs.

sorry if i've offended anyone with this. i'm speaking from my heart.

my beliefs are that of a Sikh. The Teachings of the 11th Master are enough for me. The teachings there are perfect. The are not potentially imperfect like that of AKJ, 3HO, GnNSJ etc.

See this is the problem with this sort of witch hunt, as soon as someone makes a comments or questions an aspect of Sikhism he/she is an apostate? It won't be long before w have Spanish Inquisitions and Sharia Law at this rate.

I urge to read history and look at the evolvement of the Sikh faith and and see how many phases its has been through.

Let me take one point. If Our Guru fainted from torture, did not Jesus die on the cross? It does not make them any lesser. They were human beings and their human bodies had all the fallibilities that humans have. They were not miracle makers, did not try and change the laws of nature. For me if our Guru did faint it would not be a problem, what is more significant is that he did not give up his faith to the last.

 

[Randip Singh]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

Jios,

This is complicated stuff!!! Kala Afghana appears to be neither asking questions nor preaching. He is not asking questions as in posing statements ending with a question mark ???? in hopes of getting answers. Does he really want answers? Nor does he appear to be preaching. He does appear to be testomg deeply held beliefs, which may or may not be supportable in Bani. In other words, he may be looking for a debate (or maybe looking for a fight?). Since the list is longer than 5 questions, Mr. Afghana has been hard at work for a long time. And the information out there is so deeply vested in one side of the argument or the other, that objective analysis -- what's that?

The only "list" I could find was in Wikipedia (believe it or not). Everything else was opinion. Here is the list.

Interesting points here. I want to see where I agree or disagree with him here.

Kala Afghana's (KA) views on different issues (taken from 'Bipran ki Reet to Sach da Marg')

• Bhog & Guru Granth Sahib: Doing bhog of Deg in presence of Guru Granth Sahib is manmat according to KA.

Why does he say this. He must have a reason? When did this ceremony come about?

• Sri Amritsar Ishnan: KA states that the holy water of the sarovar should NOT be referred to as Amrit.

Why does he say this? Is it because the original Amrit was created by the Guru's, and is that is the presence of our 11th guru?

• Washing our Feet: KA criticizes the practice of washing our feet before entering Darbar Sahib or our Gurduara Sahibs.

Are we doing this for ritual reasons or practical? If for a ritual then agree with KA.

• Amrit Vela: KA states how can you call a particular time of the day Amrit-Vela when so many evil things happen around the world at that time.

Hmmm. Interesting point, but relative to where that person is it is Amrit-vela, but I can see his point.

• Bhai Veer Singh Ji: KA criticizes Bhai Veer Singh Ji for making anti-Gurmat statements expresses disappointment about his works.

What is his basis for this? What is his reason?

• Bhai Veer Singh Ji, Baba Sri Chand Ji: KA accuses Bhai Veer Singh Ji of lying about Baba Sri Chand Ji, and refers to such writers as "Sikhi day Vayree" (enemies of the Sikhs).

I would want to see historical proof of this.

• Amritsar Sarovar: KA implies that there is no basis behind the belief that partaking ishnan in Amritsar sarovar will wash away one's sins. He states that it has nothing to do whatsoever with the Gurbani verse : "RamDaas Sarova Natai || Sabh Utray Pap Kamatai||

I don't believe washing in Sarovar will wash away ones sins either. It is deeds and actions that will. If we start believing this we may as well rename Sikhism Islam and make it a Pilar to go and bathe in the Sarovar.

• Baba Deep Singh Ji's memorial: KA argues against the need for a memorial for Baba Deep Singh Ji where Baba Ji's severed was laid to rest. He refers to this as idol worship. He questions even whether Baba Ji's severed head had fell at that particular place.

He's absolutely right on this. People do worship the place and bow to his photo. It has become idol worship. I have been there and I was disgusted with people behaviour.

• Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit: KA questions the historical reference that (1)Amrit could revive the dead (the Panj Piarays).(2)Amrit could rid one of previous sins.(3)He states that this kind of belief will convince an Amritdharee to committ further sins.(4)He states that Guru Gobind Singh Ji never accepted the Panj as his Guru (Appay Guru Chella)(5)KA states that the reference to Guru Gobind Singh of reviving the Panj Piyarays after cutting their "sees" are pure lies.

I do not believe The Tenth Master killed the 5 beloved ones and revived them. So called eye witness accounts are unreliable (and there is only one I have heard of). This is miracle making. People have missed the whole point of what occurred at Basakhi all those years ago. All this businesses about reviving the dead is Vashnavite spin.

• Baba Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale: KA states that Baba Jarnail Singh Ji committed acts that brought about the current downfall of the Panth. Baba Jarnail Singh Ji desecrated Sri Darbar Sahib when defended and fortified it. By giving shastars and motorcycles to the Sikh youth, he (Baba Jarnail Singh) made us into murderers and robbers (dakoos). KA states that even after Baba Harnam Singh also joined in, their Panthic wishes were never fullfilled. He questions their sincerity and wonders if they were are all "bhekhee" (charlatans).

Downfall of the Panth occured in 1984 now whether Bhindranwala is responsible or the GOI or both is questionable. As a pro Bindranwala supporter back in the 80's this is very close to my heart. Bhindranwala was brave and had a very Spartan interpretation of Sikhi. He, however, lacked political acumen. It is this fact that has led to our downfall.

As for being Dakoos, we Sikhs are Dakoo's or Kings when the need arises.

• Khanday-Batay da Amrit & Sweet Pittasay: KA states that to consider that sweet Pittasay were to be used in preparation of Amrit is a maha-Paap (enormous sin) since it implies that : (1) Dasam Patshah must have understood Naam-Amrit to be bitter. (2) Dasam Patshah had forgotten the Pittasay and his mistake was corrected by Mata Jito Jee. States that this Pittasay eposide is a myth and was made up by the enemies of this faith.

Whether Pittasay were used or not is immaterial. This is making a mountain out of a molehill, by KA and his detractors. It is what Amrit means that is important.

• Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & 3 Banees of Dasam Patshah: KA ridicules reference to Jaap Sahib, Swaiyay, and Chaupai Sahib as Banees recited during Amrit-Sanchar.

Why does he ridicule? He must give a reason? What is this?

• Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & 5 Banees: KA states only the Banees in Guru Granth Sahib were part of the Amrit-Sanchar ceremony. To consider that other three (Jaap Sahib, Swaiyay, and Chaupai Sahib as Banees) were read by the Guru Gobind Singh Ji is utterly direspectful to our SatGurus.

Well there maybe some truth as Guruji didnt consider his own compositions as worthy of being in SGGSji, such was his humility.

• Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & reviving of the Panj Piyaray & Shakti: KA ridicules the concept of Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & reviving of the Panj Piaray & the divine powers (Shakti) of Amrit. He also referrs to Amrit-dharees as "Papian di Santaan" (offspring of sinners)

I don't believe they were revived from the dead since I do not belive our Guru's used any miracles whatsoever.

• Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit & Patits: KA states that was responsible for making Sikh children cut their Kes, smoke tobacco, and become Patits. States that for Sikhs, becoming a Singh is a "bharm" (superstition) of the mind. He also states that those who consider Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit as becoming "Guru-waley" (inititation into Sikhism) are mistaken.

I can kind of understand this. JUst by tking Amrit you are not necessarily a Sikh. A Sikh is one who is so through deed and action.

• Amrit & Naam: KA states that calling Amrit Naam is BrahmanVaad.

I would want see why he says this?

• Jao Tao Premo Khellan… & Baba Deep Singh: KA ridicules the use of this tuk in reference to Baba Deep Singh deed of fighting with his sis on his palm.

Why?

• Adultery & Bhai Randhir Singh: KA states that Bhai Randhir Singh Ji wrote that Adultery was allowed in the Rahit.

I don't have much time for Bhai Randhir Singh, infact the more I have read about him the more I find him quite hypocritical (but thats my opinion), but where is his proof of this?

• Charan-Amrit: KA ridicules that Sikh tradition of Charan-Amrit that existed until Khanday-Batay-da-Amrit replaced it in 1699. He refers to it as a Brahmanic ritual.

Charan Amrit is a Brahmanical ritual, but was replaced.

• Panj Piaray & Guru Gobind Singh Ji: He states that Guru Gobind Singh Ji never accepted the Panj as his Guru (Appay Guru Chella)

There are far too many incidents where Guruji bowed to the will of Panj Pyarey for this to be true. I would however, be interested in his reasoning for this.

• Panj Piaray & Amritdharis: KA ridicules Panj Piaray & Amritdharis, tells story of a man who was so fed up with Amritdharis that he cut his Kes and never kept them again.

I feel like that about many Amritdhari’s.

• Anand-Karj: He ridicules the Panth Parvan Anand-Karj Ceremony. Lables the Anand Maryada as based on Brahmanic Rituals.

It may well be but I would want to see proof.

• Bhai Randhir Singh: Labels Bhai Randhir Singh as a "Bipree Agent" (an agent of the Brahmans)

Don’t know about Brahmin Agent but Bhai Randhir certainly had some Vashnavite leanings that sit very uncomfortably with Sikhism.

• Bhai Randhir Singh, Bhindranwale & others: Ridicules Bhai Randhir Singh, Bhindranwale, and other Mahapurakhs for having belief in Chitar-Gupt, Dharam-Raaj, Jums, Narak/Surag, and the afterworld.

I don’t belive in these things either. All Hindu concepts, nothing to do with Sikhism. They have some unwittingly Vashnavite leanings.

• Khanday-Batay, Amrit & Mantar: States that the water put in a sarovar or bowl (Khanday-Batay) can never be called Amrit. Nor can anyone blow any Mantar (WaheGuru) in water and turn it into anything powerful (Amrit). He credits the Brahmans for creating such a belief.

I would want to see his reasoning behind this. I belive the original concept of Amrit as handed down by the 10th Master has been lost and it has some Brahmanical tinges nowadays.

Whatever his deficiencies as a human being, Mr. Afghana has a talent for stirring the pot. That could be one reason why so many are antagonized by his behavior. I myself cannot tell if he is just looking for a fight, or actually wants to have a reciprocal exchange of views. And he doesn't have much patience with Hindus. So are his test questions sincere or not? Can a reasonably objective person be blamed for being suspicious if he/she can't tell if Mr. Afghana is testing established beliefs to get closer to the "truth" (with a small t) as he sees it, or is simply out to enjoy the thrill of target practice?

Don’t you find it ironic that KA criticises Brahmins so heavily yet he is a Brahmin RSS Agent?

 

[Harjas Kaur Khalsa]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

Indexed as:
Khalsa v. Bhullar

Between
Gurbaksh Singh Khalsa, Plaintiff, and
Taranjit Kaur Bhullar, Hariner Singh Bhullar, Gurnham Singh
Bajwa and Kahar Singh Pannu, Defendants

[1992] B.C.J. No. 378
Victoria Registry No. 89/1983

British Columbia Supreme Court
Victoria, British Columbia
Macdonell J.

Heard: September 3 - 6, 9 - 12 and November 7, 1991
Judgment: February 24, 1992
(15 pp.)


Torts - Defamation 2- Defences - Truth. Sexual assault - Damages - General damages - Punitive damages - Punitive damage award appropriate where a /1 priest of the Sikh religion breached his position of trust by sexually assaulting a parishioner. The plaintiff sued for damages for defamation of character. The defendants counterclaimed for damages for sexual assault. The plaintiff was a priest of a Sikh religious temple. The summer following the incident which was the subject of this lawsuit, the plaintiff was discharged. The plaintiff was 68-years-old, and resided in the living quarters with his wife and a daughter. His argument was that a faction in the temple wanted to get rid of him, so they attempted to put him in a compromising position with Mrs. B. He claimed that she wrongfully exposed herself before him and was sexually aggressive towards him, and that he took no part in it. He further argued that such a false accusation against a priest is particularly devastating; in fact it resulted in his being wrongfully dismissed and being unable to obtain further employment as a priest. The case for the defence was that the plaintiff was not defamed and that, in fact, the allegation of sexual assault was true.

HELD: The plaintiffs action was dismissed. The defendant Mrs. B succeeded on her counterclaim, having proved that the plaintiff in fact sexually assaulted her. The court awarded her $5,000.00 in general damages, and $5,000.00 in special damages. The plaintiff had failed to prove his allegation of a wrongful accusation of sexual assault. The defendants had proved their counterclaim AND THE COURT FOUND THAT IN FACT THE SEXUAL ASSAULT HAD TAKEN PLACE. With respect to general damages for the sexual assault, the court had to bear in mind the gravity of the assault, the circumstances of it, and its effect on Mrs. B. The assault was of a relatively minor nature in the sense that there was only one incident. The assault here was committed by a priest in the living quarters of a Sikh temple upon a parishioner who was requested to attend by the priest. The emotional impact of the forceful touching of the plaintiffs chest and the attempt to remove her stockings was not only offensive but appalling, particularly as the priest in the Sikh religion is held in high esteem and the utmost in decorum is expected of him. He was in a position of trust and abused the trust. On the other hand, there did not appear to be any serious after-effects on Mrs. B other than distaste for the whole matter. The impact on Mrs. B would be lessened by her vindication in this lawsuit, allowing her to save face.

MACDONELL J.:- The plaintiffs action against the defendants is for defamation of character arising out of an accusation by the defendant Taranjit Bhullar that she was sexually assaulted by the plaintiff, which accusation was published by the defendants. The defendant Mrs. Bhullar alleges that the plaintiff sexually assaulted her, and she and her husband counterclaim for damages against the plaintiff.

The background, briefly, is that the plaintiff at all material times was the priest at the Topaz Street Temple of the Khalsa Diwan Society, which is a Sikh religious society. The plaintiff came to Canada in 1984 and resided for a year in Grand Prairie with his daughter. Prior to coming to Canada, he had been a policeman in the Punjab and retired with the rank of Inspector in 1981. He had no training in the priesthood but was a devout Sikh. There does not seem to be much dispute that he was knowledgeable in the religion and was qualified to act as a priest, as there does not appear to be any need for prior formal religious training to act as a priest in a temple. While in Grand Prairie, he saw an advertisement in an ethnic ne"",spaper advertising for a priest at Golden. He applied and was successful and presided as a priest there for some nine months. With this experience he was accepted as a priest at 1 00 Mile House where he presided for a year. He then heard of an opening at the Topaz Street Temple in Victoria and on October 1st, 1986, he was employed there as the priest on a contract basis which provided for two months' notice by either party. He continued as priest until the summer following the incident which is the subject of this law suit, when he was discharged.

The plaintiff was sixty-eight years of age at all material times, was married and had children. He and his wife and a daughter resided in the living quarters of the temple. Following his appointment, things went along reasonably well, although there was friction with the executive of the Society - no doubt partly due to the plaintiffs rigidity in some areas. Toward the end of December, 1987 the friction between him and the Committee increased and the plaintiff became convinced that a group in the temple, including the defendants, wished to be rid of him. It is his position that there was a conspiracy to effect his removal, starting with their sending a white woman to the temple to compromise him sexually. That plot failed as she was drunk. He alleges that thereafter there was a meeting between the various defendants and others who plotted to have the female defendant compromise him, again with the purpose of getting rid of him. However, as part of his case, the plaintiff alleges only the slander and not a conspiracy to remove him as priest, which seems to be the subject matter of another lawsuit.

The plaintiff testified that he met the Bhullars in 1986 and that they were regular attenders at the temple. They were helpful with his daughter's marriage and by 1987 he and the Bhullars became good friends. He testified that from time to time he saw Mrs. Bhullar alone and that at times they discussed problems she had with her husband. He described their relationship as that of a family membership.

The female defendant is thirty-five years of age and her husband is a comparable age. The plaintiff said that in 1988, when Mrs. Bhullar left one night after visiting, she embraced him and kissed him on the cheek. He said that he was very upset by this. He said that following this she telephoned him and explained that such conduct was not unusual in Canada. He said that in January and February 1989 nothing of a sexual nature took place between them and that they did not meet privately during that time. He said that on March 25th, which was just prior to his and his wife's visit to Seattle, Mrs. Bhullar came to the temple at lunchtime in response to a call from him. He said they took food after her arrival and then he went to take a rest in his bedroom. He said that the defendant came into the room. At that time he was sitting on a chair removing his jacket. He said that she removed her blouse, exposing her naked breasts, sat on his lap, and put her hands around his neck. He testified that she said, "I know you need me". He said he was stunned and pushed her away, telling her that this was not the way for a daughter to act. The defendant left and the plaintiff then went to the temple and prostrated himself before the Holy Book. He said that he and his wife left for Seattle the next day, returning April 5th of 1989. He telephoned Mrs. Bhullar at her office but as she was busy she telephoned him the following day. He said he recorded the call on his answering machine. He said he told her he would tell her husband that she was not acting like a daughter. He said he did, in fact, telephone her husband on the 6th and told him that his wife was not faithful. He met her husband in the afternoon and spoke to him further. He said that on April 30th there was a meeting of the Committee and his employment and raise were discussed. He denied that there was any condition of immediate dismissal in the case of lack of moral turpitude. He said he did not speak to the defendants from April through to June. On July 22nd, there was a meeting of the Temple Committee and the plaintiff was advised by Mr. Bajwa and Mr. Pannu that Mr. and Mrs. Bhullar had lodged a complaint against him and that there was a tape of a conversation between the plaintiff and Mrs. Bhullar. The tape was apparently played, which resulted in the plaintiffs employment being terminated. After listening to the tape and hearing the accusation of Mrs. Bhullar, the Committee accepted as a fact that the plaintiff had sexually assaulted the female defendant.

The plaintiffs position is that this allegation is false and that the true state of affairs is that it was the defendant who wrongfully exposed herself before him and was sexually aggressive toward him, and that he took no part in it. The plaintiffs position is that such a false accusation against a priest is particularly devastating; in fact it resulted in his being wrongfully dismissed and being unable to obtain further employment as a priest.

A considerable amount of evidence was called with respect to various taped telephone conversations, produced by both the plaintiff and the defendants Bhullar, and other evidence of conflicts in the temple which do not relate much to the law suit. The plaintiff alleges that there was a conspiracy to remove him and that the conduct of the female defendant which he described was orchestrated by a group in the Committee, which included Mr. Pannu and Mr. Bajwa, to compromise the plaintiff. The plaintiff called Mr. Gurbakash Sihota, who testified that he met the defendants Bajwa and Pannu in February 1989 and that Mr. Johal, Mr. Ajwall and Mr. Sanhera were there. The meeting was at approximately 9:00 p.m. and was arranged to congratulate Bajwa and Pannu for their election to office on the Temple Committee. The last three mentioned come from Vancouver. He said they then discussed getting rid of the plaintiff, as there was a complaint by Mr. Bajwa about the priest interfering in a wedding ceremony when Mr. Bajwa sang a poem. Mr. Pannu's complaint was that the priest contradicted his mother-in-law. The consensus was that they should get rid of the priest and that they had a girl ready to entice him into making sexual advances. The name mentioned was the female defendant, Bhullar. Mr. Sihota said that Pannu had mentioned that they had tried a white lady but it did not work because she got drunk when she was sent to the temple and the plaintiff" got away". In cross-examination the witness tied himself to the meeting taking place on February 11 tho

The case for the defence is that the plaintiff was not defamed and that, in fact, the allegation of a sexual assault is true. The Bhullars in their counterclaim ask for damages against the plaintiff for the sexual assault.

The female defendant is thirty-five years of age, was born in India and came to Canada in 1962, where she took her education through Grade 12 at Oak Bay High School and Camosun College. She has been with the Workers Compensation Board for some seventeen years and is presently a Claims Adjudicator, a position she has held for some four years. She was married in 1985 and has one daughter of five years of age. Her husband works for the Municipality of Saanich. They met the plaintiff when he became a priest. They attended the Topaz Street Temple regularly from 1986 through 1988 and they became close to the plaintiff. Initially, Mrs. Bhullar and her husband responded to his need for help in the community as he was a stranger. In 1987 the plaintiff needed a drive to a religious ceremony. Mrs. Bhullar drove him there and said he put his hand on her hand and she asked him to take it off. He later asked, "How about a kiss?" and she said, "You've got to be kidding". She told her husband about this incident and they cut down their visits with the plaintiff and their attendance at the temple significantly. She said that at the end of 1988 the plaintiff called her to meet him in private to talk over his problems. She said they met at the temple and nothing untoward happened. In December of 1988 the plaintiff was persistently telephoning her and at times asked her to bring food. On one occasion she did take along Chinese food and it was consumed in his quarters. On leaving she said he asked for a hug and a kiss and that she pushed him away. Following this she received telephone calls at work and by January and February 1989 he was calling her as much as four times a day, two or three times a week. In addition, when she was not available, she received messages from time to time that "Father had called". She said that in early January the plaintiff had telephoned and was very angry and upset with her as somebody in his family had died and the Bhullars had not been available to help him. She said that in mid-February the plaintiff wanted to meet her at the library in the temple for lunch as he wanted to talk to her. She went and was met at the top of the stairs by the plaintiff, who said the lunch was laid on in the library. She asked where his wife and daughter were and he told her they had had their lunch and were sleeping. She said "We went to another room, which was the guest room, where lunch was laid out". There were two beds and a dresser. They ate the food sitting on the beds. He sat on one and she sat on the other. She said that the plaintiff came to the bed and put his arm around her and pushed her back onto the bed. She said he put his hand underneath her blouse and with his other hand tugged at her skirt. She said she tried to pull away. He told her he couldn't take her nylons off, although he was trying. She said she pulled herself together and pushed him away. She said she "got loud", meaning that she raised her voice. He said "Don't get loud, the bitches are sleeping in the next room". Mrs. Bhullar then left through the library and went back to work, very upset. At that time she did not discuss what had happened with Ms. Mettis, her case assistant, although Ms. Mettis asked her what was the matter. She said in April she received a call from the plaintiff threatening to blackmail her. He said that he had a taped conversation which incriminated her. She said she was devastated. She reported to work as usual, but while going over a file with Ms. Mettis she broke down in tears and then told her what had happened at the temple. She was advised to tell her husband, which she did. They did not attend at the temple after that. Following her disclosure of the assault to her husband they went to the police, who suggested that the matter be sorted out in the Sikh community. She said to protect themselves against a case of slander they purchased a recording device and that during conversations with the plaintiff she led him to believe that she had not told her husband. Various conversations were recorded. At the same time, the plaintiff was busy recording conversations on his machine.

Mrs. Bhullar denies that she was a party to any conspiracy to compromise the plaintiff with the purpose of having him removed.

The defendant husband was called and his evidence paralleled that of his wife. He also testified that he was not a party to any agreement to effect the removal of the plaintiff.

The other defendants were called and they all gave evidence to the same effect. After hearing Mrs. Bhullar's accusation of sexual assault by the plaintiff, which they believed, and the taped telephone conversations, they concluded that he had in fact committed a sexual assault and this was the foundation for his being removed as a priest. The defendants deny that there was any meeting as alleged by Mr. Sihota.

The defence called Ms. Mettis, who confirmed the evidence of the female defendant and, in particular, the numerous calls made by the plaintiff to Mrs. Bhullar, her emotional state following the visit to the temple, and what was disclosed to her later when Mrs. Bhullar broke down at the office.

The defence called Mr. Rajinder Sihota, who is a senior accountant with the Ministry of Finance. He testified that on February 13th, 1989 he was in a police station in the Punjab with respect to a complaint concerning Gurbakash Sihota, the witness called for the plaintiff who alleged the conspiracy meeting. Mr. Rajinder Sihota testified that the plaintiffs witness was not only in the Punjab on the 13th February, but had been there for some time. Logistically it would not have been possible for him to be in Victoria on February lIth due to time changes and travelling time. Mr. Rajinder Sihota also testified that the plaintiffs witness Sihota was a cousin of his and had a bad reputation. In addition, he had information that his cousin had been in the Punjab for a few months at that time.

The defence's position can be summarized as a complete denial of the allegation of defamation or of a conspiracy. With respect to the counterclai:t;n, the defence claims that the evidence of the defendants should be accepted and that the Court should find that the plaintiff sexually assaulted the female defendant.

I have to assess the credibility of the various witnesses called and also consider the tape recordings which have been led in evidence and the allegation by the defence that the plaintiffs tape recordings have been tampered with and are, in fact, extracts from other conversations taken out of context. The defence also takes the position that the tape recordings that have been produced by the defence make it quite clear that the plaintiff admitted to the sexual assault. Both the plaintiff and the defence called evidence of experts dealing with the authenticity of the tapes. The defendants' expert listened to the tapes and conducted sound tests. In my view, his evidence should be preferred to that of the plaintiffs expert, who did not carry out this testing. The conclusion of the defendants' expert is that the tape of the plaintiff was not prepared, as he testified, by using a tape recorder or answering machine and speaking to an answering machine and telephone, but that in fact all the conversations were taken from a telephone line. I find this evidence credible. I accept it and conclude that the tape prepared by the plaintiff has been concocted by him and not recorded as he testified. Listening to the defendants' tapes with the assistance of the witnesses and the interpreter persuades me that the inference to be taken from them is that the plaintiff admitted to sexually assaulting the female defendant and that the Committee was well justified in accepting the evidence of Mrs. Bhullar and the tapes in concluding that the plaintiff had sexually assaulted her.

With respect to the alleged meeting between the executives at Mr. Sihota's house, I conclude that this evidence was fabricated and quite untrue and I accept the evidence of Mr. Rajinder Sihota called for the defence that the plaintiffs witness Sihota was in fact in the Punjab at the time when the supposed conversation and conspiracy took place.

I conclude therefore that the plaintiff has failed to prove his allegation of a wrongful accusation of sexual assault and find that in fact the sexual assault did take place. The plaintiffs action is accordingly dismissed with costs.

With respect to the counterclaim, I find that the defendants have proved their counterclaim and that the plaintiff in fact sexually assaulted the female defendant. The plaintiff - who, as a priest in a position of authority and influence, sexually assaulted a female parishioner in the tight-knit society of the Sikh community in Victoria - is guilty of an extremely serious offence.

DAMAGES

The counterclaim is advanced by both Bhullars against the plaintiff for the sexual assault. It is my view that the only one who can succeed in the counterclaim is Mrs. Bhullar. The defendant argues as if there is a counterclaim for defamation of character as well as sexual assault, but in fact that is not what the pleadings disclose. In any event, a case has not been made out to entitle Mr. Bhullar to damages.

With respect to general damages for the sexual assault, I have to bear in mind the gravity of the assault, the circumstances of it, and its effect on Mrs. Bhullar. In this case, unlike a number of others where damages have been sought for sexual assault, the assault is of a comparatively minor nature in the sense that there was only the one incident, as opposed to cases where the assault was a rape or a similar crime of violence, or assaults on younger people, that have often continued over a number of years. Little is to be gained by trying to compare damages in cases that are not similar to the case at bar, so I do not propose to review the current authorities which are not bountiful. What I have to deal with here is an assault by a priest in the living quarters of a Sikh temple upon a parishioner who was requested to attend by the priest, who is the plaintiff. The emotional impact of the forceful touching of the plaintiffs chest and the attempt to take off her stockings is not only offensive but appalling, particularly as the priest in the Sikh religion is held in high esteem and the utmost in decorum is expected of him. He was in a position of trust and abused that trust. The assault was made possible because of the respect of Mrs. Bhullar for the plaintiff as priest and her being at the temple at all was at his request. With respect to the consequences or the effect on Mrs. Bhullar, there is very little evidence before me other than her feelings of humiliation, shock and degradation. There do not appear to be any serious after-effects other than distaste for the whole matter. Consequently, it is my view that the damages should reflect the seriousness of the assault but damages in other more serious cases should be borne in mind to keep a balanced perspective of damages under this head. To some extent the impact on Mrs Bhullard is lessened, as her success in this lawsuit vindicates her and face is saved in a society where it is very important. By the same token, the plaintiff is discredited and has lost all respect and credibility in his community. I award general damages to Mrs. Bhullar in the amount of $5,000.00 for the sexual assault.

A claim has been advanced for punitive damages. In this case it is my view that it is appropriate that punitive damages be awarded. They are not awarded on the basis of compensation but on the principle of punishment. In this case no criminal proceedings were launched, although the Bhullars did report the matter to the police, who left it to the Sikh community to sort out the matter and did not proceed with charges. Consequently, the element of punishment of the plaintiff for his conduct has not been addressed. In this case punitive damages need be awarded to express society's disapproval of the conduct of the plaintiff as a priest in authority and trust breaching that trust and sexually assaulting a parishioner. His attempting, after that, to manufacture evidence and shift the blame away from himself and his harassment of Mrs. Bhullar is despicable. I award the sum of $5,000.00 as punitive damages. Mrs. Bhullar will have her costs of the counterclaim and pre-judgment interest at the rate set by the Registrar from time to time.

MACDONELL J.

(JUDGE)

http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Khalsa+v.+Bhullar+%5B1992%5D+BCJ+No.+378+(BCSC)&hl=en&um=1&ie=UTF-8&oi=scholart

 

[Inder singh]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

Randip singh

sikhism does not end at teachings of SGGS.That caters to a sikh's spritiual quest.Then we have miri , a temporal aspect that is as important as teachings in SGGS ji.

This is called Guru panth.sikhism is not pick and choose.It is a wholesome.

If you want to know about kala afghana read the link below

FORT: PANTH KHALSA

Then whatever questions are there we can help you .

 

[Archived_Member1]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

pk70 ji

You lost me. I don't even think KA's efforts were worth making. If a Sikh was completely unaware that this controversy was taking place, would it change anything in terms of that individual Sikh's personal belief, spiritual practice or genuine devotion?

some suggest he is an agent of Congress party or Government of India, trying to create division within the panth to weaken sikhs further.

i'm not saying i agree or disagree with this position, it's just one possible reason.

 

[Archived_Member1]

Re: Allagation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

I urge to read history and look at the evolvement of the Sikh faith and and see how many phases its has been through.

Let me take one point. If Our Guru fainted from torture, did not Jesus die on the cross? It does not make them any lesser. They were human beings and their human bodies had all the fallibilities that humans have. They were not miracle makers, did not try and change the laws of nature. For me if our Guru did faint it would not be a problem, what is more significant is that he did not give up his faith to the last.

i have read and am continuing to read books on sikh history. by sikhs, persians, and european missionaries.

one portuguese missionary described the torture of Guru Arjun Sahib and said that he withstood impossible pain with dignity. i'll get the book, source, and exact quote as soon as i finish unpacking my new house, sorry i can't give you the reference now.

you don't believe Guru's created miracles? i do. 100%. the important thing is that they did not make miracles on the demand of others, nor did they use them for personal gain. but to say they were mere human beings is incredibly insulting to me. if you claim to believe SGGS as your guru, you would know that Guru is far more than a "normal human being".

and what is your problem with AKJ, 3HO, etc? why do you make reference against them in nearly every post?

it seems like i used to agree with you on many issues, but lately your statements seem very different. what has changed?

 

[Inder singh]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

All his life he was a low level policeman taking bribes and having no knowledge of Gurbani.How in old age he grasped so much and wrote ten books in 6 years.That was a monumental task and can never be the work of one individual who does not know Punjabi even.

 

[spnadmin]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

Randip ji, and other jios!

In order to make any sense of this I had to put the sexual elements of the debate to one side. Calling attention a person's character or his lack of education, in order to undermine his/her argument, is a form of logical fallacy called argumentum ad hominem. Evidence of low character tells us that a person has a low character. Evidence of low character does not shed light on whether or not his/her argument is supportable in evidence or in logic. Lack of education does not necessarily impair the ability to think clearly.

My own position on this is not objective either. I am suggesting that KA was picking at some assumptions believed by him to be baseless -- his motivations are unclear to me at this time. To date he has managed to rile a lot of people up, managed to get himself excommunicated (which probably doesn't bother him, again one has to imagine why), and achieved this by throwing a long list of allegations into the arena, none of which strike at the core of the Sikh religion. If you don't agree with me on that last point, just for the moment indulge me. My question is: why did he bother?

He is not going to find much in SGGS to support each and every one of his points independently. A handful of tuks. That is all. Similarly his opponents are not going to find much in SGGS to refute him. Even where history can give some arguments some weight, historical evidence doesn't help him either.

Two examples.

Baba Deep Singh Ji's memorial: KA argues against the need for a memorial for Baba Deep Singh Ji where Baba Ji's severed was laid to rest. He refers to this as idol worship. He questions even whether Baba Ji's severed head had fell at that particular place.

This allegation cannot be supported in Gurbani. It can't be refuted in Gurbani either. One has to depend on the oral tradition to support this statement. The oral tradition is a fallible source of evidence in any culture. Even if archaeologists found bones, could they prove they belonged to Baba ji? It doesn't matter. What matters is his conclusion -- idol worship is being promoted. Here KA is himelf drawing a faulty conclusion -- KA has neither evidence nor logic on his side. He is making a claim that suits his agenda or frame of mind-- whatever that is - by attributing motives to people, as if he is a mind reader. Go through the list. There are a number of arguments like this one about Baba Deep Singh ji and his head. In the end, it is the moral of the story about Baba Deep Singh that is a core belief in Sikhism, not Baba's head or where is fell.

This is the one that slays me the most.
Khanday-Batay, Amrit & Mantar: States that the water put in a sarovar or bowl (Khanday-Batay) can never be called Amrit. Nor can anyone blow any Mantar (WaheGuru) in water and turn it into anything powerful (Amrit). He credits the Brahmans for creating such a belief.

Imagine that I am waiting quietly during the amrit ceremony for my turn to be baptized. I am nervous, I don't know how I will react, I want to feel the force of the Naam enter my heart. But in the back of mind I have this doubt. Maybe KA is right. Maybe the ceremony is based on a incredible belief. Would this really stop me dead? And would I run out of the ceremony thinking, WoW I have just narrowly escaped from the trap of Hindu thought and saved my intellectual integrity? Of course not. All of this is hypothetical in my case, but of course I would not react this way. Who else would run away once he/she was now aware of KA's claim? The only person to run away would be the person missing the real point of the amrit ceremony. If panj pyaare did not use this ritual they would use another ritual. And ritual is important for symbolic reasons -- ritual conveys the spiritual content of an event, it solemnizes the event. The mantar was chosen because of its spiritual content.

So I was trying to be very responsible in thinking through KA's points. Trying to find historical support and support from Gurmat (or lack of support in Gurmat) when it finally hit me -- I might agree with him about something in fact or theory, but his arguments are only theoretically interesting. He is toying with people.

 

[Inder singh]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

In sikhism personal character is supreme consideration.How can he deliver sermons to others when he has low life.It does not make any sense.

He condemns respect for harmandir sahib,Guru granth sahib,ridiclues kirtan,name call Bhindrewale whom he claims to be an associate,knows nothing about Dasam granth that he condemns.

Watch what he is talking about

http://video.aol.com/video-detail/sants-vs-afgana-part-1-sri-dasam-granth-
sahib-ji/1431439275

Sants Vs Afgana Part 2 - (Sri Dasam Granth Sahib Ji) - AOL Video

 

[spnadmin]

Re: Allegation of sexual abuse by S. Gurbax Singh Ji Kala Afghana Ji.

Inder ji

I will concede your main argument. Tell me this. If he were a person of high character would that make his allegations more acceptable?

You can't respond by saying that only a person of low character would say such things, because there is a long list of people who have not been accused of sexual misconduct who agree with KA.