Sikh Organizations: India not a Hindu Nation

Ram Puniyani
October 26, 2019

RSS ideologues and leaders regularly keep stating that India is a Hindu Rashtra. This has been most annoying for the religious minorities, particularly Muslims, Sikhs and all those believing in Indian Constitution. This Dussera; when RSS supremo Mohan Bhagwat; in his hour long speech reiterated the same formulation, a large number of Sikh organizations and intellectuals showed their opposition to it and at many a places protests has been planned against this statement.

Editorials in prominent Punjabi newspapers like Punjabi Tribune and Nawa Zamana criticized the statement in strong terms. While the Shiromani Gurudwara Prabandhak Committee (SGPC) and the Shromani Akali Dal (SAD) which is a constituent of the NDA and has been an ally of BJP also gave strong reaction to the statement of Mr. Bhagwat. Giani Harpreet Singh, the acting jathedar (head priest) of Akal Takht said that he believes the RSS’s actions will create divisions in the country. “The statements being made by RSS leaders are not in the country’s interests,” he told the media in Amritsar on Monday. Also Punjab Lok Morcha chief Amolak Singh stronger language to point out that the statement was part of a bigger conspiracy and must ring alarm bells.

This strong reaction against Bhagwat’s statement from Sikh organizations has a reason behind it. Sikhs are being projected as part of Hinduism by RSS so this strong reaction from these organizations. This is not the first time that Sikhs are showing such a reaction. One recalls that in the past also similar statements from Hindu nationalist organizations have drawn such an opposition and criticism. In year 2000 when K. Sudarshan was the Sarsanghchalak he went on to say that Sikhism is a sect of Hindu religion and Khalsa was created to protect Hindus from Mughal tyranny. RSS has also floated an organization, Rashtriya Sikh Sangat, to co-opt Sikhism into the fold of Hinduism. Even earlier there were protests in Punjab.

The origin of Sikhism with Sant Guru Nanak has been one of the major phenomenons of Sixteenth Century in India. Guru Naka’s teachings came in the backdrop of prevalent Brahmanism to which he and his successors were opposed.  Sikhism’s teachings drew from Bhakti-Sufi saints in particular. The latter were for egalitarian values away from the Brahmanical rigidities and inequalities dictated by them. Guru Nanak was inspired by Saint Kabir and Baba Farid in particular. Sikhism drew from diverse sources, the teachings which focused on humanism and equality of all beings. Nanak denounced orthodox practitioners of Islam as well as Hinduism and placed his emphasis on the vibrant intercommunity relationships based on the subaltern versions of Islam and Hinduism. His teachings at one level are a synthesis of the values of both the religions like reincarnation and the doctrine of Karma from Hinduism and oneness of God and congregation in worship from Islam. Sikh Gurus opposed Caste, worship of Cow and sacred thread. As this religion evolved it developed its own identity with Guru Granth Sahib as its major tome and other practices which had deep roots in intercommunity interactions.

The assertion of RSS about Sikhsim being sect of Hinduism is a part of political agenda of Hindu nationalism. It begins with the definition of Hindu by Savarkar, where Hindu is one for whom the land spread from Sindhu river to seas is their holy land and father land. This definition cleverly puts Muslims and Christians separate from the groups of people who own this land. Going further Islam and Christianity, despite their being very old were labeled as ‘foreign religions’. The attempt was to bring together all non Muslims-non Christians in a political mobilization for Hindu nation.

With time due to the political contingencies the definitions kept changing. As initially the word Hindu was used for this land spread from Sindhu River to the seas, the attempt is also on to co-opt all others in to the fold of Hindutva politics, in this direction now even Muslims and Christians are now called as Hindus in their scheme of things. This is a clever maneuver. First to call everybody as Hindus and then to impose the Hindu identity symbols: Cow, Gita, Ganga, Lord Ram: on them as their deities. This is a political intervention into the realm of religion. Murali Manohar Joshi, when he became President of BJP (1990), cleverly put that all the Muslims are Ahmadiya Hindus and all Christians are Christi Hindus.

The problems with their formulations are multiple. The confusions which they try to create are also multiple. The Jains demanding minority status had been a long struggle. The followers of Buddhism or Sikhism in no way can forget or give up their own religious identity. Earlier also attempts were made to undermine Sikh identity and Punjabi language. In the face of that Bhai Kahan Singh wrote a book, “Hum Hindu nahin” (we are not Hindus). While RSS cabal wants to call them Keshdhari Hindus (Hindus who are not cutting their hairs, long hairs and beard), Sikhs own self perception is that of being Sikhs at religious level.

So many a Sikhs ideologues have clearly stated that each Indian should follow their own religion and RSS should not try to impose the Hindu norms on Sikhs, whose traditions have been very syncretic and away from Brahmanical norms. It is in line of this that Guru Granth Sahib draws from Saint Tradition, Sufi and Bhakti both. One recalls that it was Miyan Mir who was invited to lay the foundation stone of Golden temple, the major Sikh Shrine, where intercommunity meals mark the unity of communities away from caste and religious boundaries.

Rashtriya Sikh Sangat, an arm of RSS is active in Punjab in propagating that Sikhism is a sect of Hinduism. RSS agenda of Hindutva, Hindu nationalism, which has Brahmanical values at its base, is far away from what Sikhism stands for, so no wonder that most of the Sikh groups and ideologues are standing in unison to oppose the statement that India is a Hindu Rashtra.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Ram Puniyani
January 9,2020

‘Go to Pakistan’ has probably been most often used phrase used against Muslims in India. Recently in yet another such incident the SP of Meerut, UP has been in the news and a video is circulating where he, Akhilesh Narayan Singh, is allegedly using the jibe ‘Go to Pakistan’. In the video he is seen shouting at protestors at Lisari Gate area in Meerut, “The ones (protestors) wearing those black or yellow armbands, tell them to go to Pakistan”. His seniors stood by him calling it ‘natural reaction to shouting of pro Pakistan slogans. Many BJP leaders like Uma Bhararti also defended the officer. Breaking ranks with fellow politicians, Mukhtar Abbas Naqvi of BJP, criticised the said officer and asked for suitable action against him. Interestingly this is same Naqvi, who earlier when the beef related arguments were going on; had stated that those who want to eat beef can go to Pakistan.

Interestingly this is probably the first time that any BJP leader has opposed the use of this jibe against the Indian Muslims. True to the dominance of trolls who support divisive politics, Naqvi has been trolled on the issue. As such vibe ‘Go to Pakistan’ has been a strong tool in the hands of aggressive elements to demonise Muslims in general and to humiliate those with Muslim names. One recalls that when due to the rising intolerance in the society many eminent writers, film makers were returning their awards, Aamir Khan said that his wife Kiran Rao is worried about their son. Immediately BJP worthies like Giriraj Singh pounced on him that he can go to Pakistan.

The strategy of BJP combine has been on one hand to use this ‘go to Pakistan’ to humiliate Muslims on the other from last few years another Pakistan dimension has been added. Those who are critical of the policies of BJP-RSS have on one hand been called as anti National and on the other it is being said that ‘they are speaking the language of Pakistan’.

Use of Pakistan to label the Muslims and dissidents here in India has been a very shrewd tool in the hands of communal forces. One remembers that the ‘cricket nationalism’ was also the one to use it. In case of India-Pakistan cricket match, the national hysteria, which it created, was also aiming at Indian Muslims. What was propagated was that Indian Muslims cheer for Pakistan victory and they root for Pakistan. There was an unfortunate grain of truth in this as a section of disgruntled, alienated Muslim did that. That was not the total picture, as most Indian Muslims were cheering for Indian victory. Many a Muslim cricketers contributed massively to Indian cricket victories. The cricket legends like Nawab Mansoor Ali Khan Pataudi, Irfan Pathan, and Mohammad Azaruddin are just the few among the long list of those who brought glories for India in the field of cricket.

Even in matters of defence there are legions of Muslims who contributed to Indian efforts in the war against Pakistan all through. Abdul Hamid’s role in 1965 India Pak war and the role of Muslim soldiers in Kargil war will be part of Indian military history. There have been generals in army who contributed in many ways for the role which military has been playing in service of the nation. General Zamiruddin Shah, when asked to handle Gujarat carnage, does recount how despite the lack of support from local administration for some time, eventually the military was able to quell the violence in some ways.

During freedom movement Muslims were as much part of the struggle against British rule as any other community. While the perception has been created that Muslims were demanding Pakistan, the truth is somewhere else. It was only the elite section of Muslims who supported the politics of Muslim League and later the same Muslim League could mobilize some other section and unleash the violence like ‘Direct Action’ in Kolkata, which in a way precipitated the actual process of partition, which was the goal of British and aim of Muslim League apart from this being the outcome of ‘Two Nation theory’.

Not much is popularized about the role of great number of Muslims who were part of National movement, who steadfastly opposed the idea and politics which led to the sad partition of the subcontinent. Few excellent accounts of the role of Muslims in freedom movement like Syed Nasir Ahmad, Ubaidur Rahman, Satish Ganjoo and Shamsul Islam are few of these not too well know books which give the outline of the great Muslim freedom fighters like Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan, Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, Ansari Brothers, Ashfaqulla Khan.

Immediately after partition tragedy the communal propaganda did the overdrive to blame the whole partition process on Muslim separatism, this totally undermined the fact that how poor Muslims had taken out massive marches to oppose the Lahore Resolution of separate Pakistan moved by Mohammad Ali Jinnah. The whole Muslim community started being seen as the homogenous, ‘The other’ and other misconceptions started against the community, the one’s relating them to atrocities of Muslim kings started being made as the part of popular folklore, leading the Hate against them. This Hate in turn laid the foundation of violence and eventual ghettoisation of this community.

The interactive-syncretism prevalent in India well presented by Gandhi-Nehru was pushed to the margins as those believing in pluralism did not actively engage with the issue. The economic marginalization of this community, coupled with the increasing insecurity in turn led to some of them to identify with Pakistan, and this small section was again presented as the representative of the whole Muslim community.

Today the battle of perception is heavily tilted against the Muslim community. It is a bit of a surprise as Naqvi is differing from his other fellow colleagues to say that the action should be taken against the erring police officer. The hope is that all round efforts are stepped up to combat the perception constructed against this religious minority in India. 

Comments

Prakash SS
 - 
Thursday, 9 Jan 2020

it is very much understandable if Pakistan is bad country our PM Namo would never visited without any invitation, that time Pakistan was good he prised their Mutton biriyani and Karak chai in pakistan. we feel something is wrong with our PM and his chelas. 

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.
Ram Puniyani
February 29,2020

Like most of the political phenomenon, even the practice of Nationalism is not a static one. It changes with the changing political equations of the political forces and assumes the expressions which are very diverse. As such the phenomenon of Nationalism has a long journey and various state policies in particular have used it for purposes which relate more to the power of the state ‘vis a vis’ its people, power of the state ‘vis a vis’ the neighboring countries among others.

In India there has been a certain change in the practices of the state which have transformed the meaning of Nationalism during last few years. Particularly with BJP, the Hindu Nationalist outfit gaining simple majority, it has unfolded the policies where one can discern the drastic change in the meaning and application of Nationalism in regard to its citizens, particularly those belonging to minority community, with regard to those who are liberal, and with those who stand with the concept of Human rights.

Our former Prime Minister of Dr. Manmohan Singh hit the nail on the head when he said that “Nationalism and the "Bharat Mata Ki Jai" slogan are being misused to construct a "militant and purely emotional" idea of India that excludes millions of residents and citizens. Former Prime Minister recently stated this in an apparent attack on the BJP.” The occasion was the release of a book, ‘Who is Bharat Mata’, edited by Purushottam Agarwal and Radhakrishna. This is a compilation of significant extracts from writings of Nehru, and important assessments of and contributions of Nehru by prominent personalities.

Dr. Singh went on to add "With an inimitable style…Nehru laid the foundation of the universities, academies and cultural institutions of Modern India. But for Nehru's leadership, independent India would not have become what it is today," This statement of Dr. Singh has great importance in contemporary times, as Nehru is being denigrated by Hindu nationalists for all the problems which India is facing today and attempts are on to undermine his role and glorifying Sardar Vallabh Bhai Patel. This is also significant as it gives us the glimpses of what Nationalism meant for Nehru.

As Singh’s statement captures the present nationalism being practiced by BJP and company, the Hindu nationalists, immediately shot back saying that Dr. Singh is supporting the anti India activities at JNU and Jamia and his party is supporting the anti India nationalists. They asked whether Singh likes the nationalism of the likes of Shashi Tharoor or Manishankar Ayer who are provoking the Shaheen Bagh protest rather than making the protestors quiet. Whether he likes the anti national protests which go on at JNU or Jamia? As per them there is no Nationalism in Congress. One more example being cited is the private visit of Shatrughan Sinha who talked to Pakistani President during his visit there recently!

Most of the arguments being used to oppose Dr. Singh are very superficial. What is being referred to; is not opposition to Indian nationalism and its central values which were the core of anti colonial struggles. While ‘Bharat Mata Ki Jai’ may not be acceptable to a section of population, even the book he was releasing has the title ‘Who is Bharat Mata’. What is being stated by Singh is the twist which slogan ‘Bharat Mata ki Jai’ has been used by Hindu nationalists to frighten the religious minorities.

Indian nation came into being on the values, which later were the foundation of Indian Constitution. Indian Constitution carefully picked up the terminology which was away from the concepts of Hindu or Muslim nationalism. That’s how the country came to be called as ‘India that is Bharat’. The freedom of expression which was the hallmark of freedom movement and it was given a pride of place in our Constitution. It respected the diversity and formulated rules where the nation was not based on particular culture, as Hindu nationalists will like us to believe, but cultural diversity was centrally recognized in the Constitution. In addition promoting good relations with neighbors and other countries of the World was also part of our principles.

JNU, Jamia and AMU are being demonized as most institutions so far regard the freedom of expression as a core part of Indian democracy. These institutions have been thriving on discussions and debates which have base in liberalism. Deliberately some slogans have been constructed to defame these institutions. While Constitution mandates good relations with neighbors, creation of ‘Anti Pakistan hysteria’ is the prime motive of many a channels and sections of other media, which are servile to the ideology of ruling Government. They also violate most of the norms of ethical journalism, where the criticism of the ruling party is an important factor to keep the ruling dispensation in toes.

A stifling atmosphere has been created during last six years. In this the Prime Minster can take a detour, land in Pakistan to have a cup of tea with Pakistan PM, but a Congress leader talking to Pakistani President is a sign of being anti National. Students taking out a march while reading the preamble of Indian Constitution are labeled as anti-national; and are stopped while those openly wielding guns near Jamia or Shaheen Bagh roam freely.

Nationalism should promote amity and love of the people; it should pave the way for growth and development. Currently the nationalism which is dominant and stalking the streets has weakened the very fraternity, which is one of the pillars of our democracy. Nehru did explain that Bharat Mata is not just our mountains, rivers and land but primarily the people who inhabit the land. Which nationalism to follow was settled during the freedom movement when Muslim nationalism and Hindu nationalism were rejected by the majority of people of India in favor of the Nationalism of Gandhi, Nehru, Patel and Maulana Azad, where minorities are equal citizens, deserving affirmative action. In today’s scenario the Hindu nationalists cannot accept any criticism of their policies.

Comments

Add new comment

  • Coastaldigest.com reserves the right to delete or block any comments.
  • Coastaldigset.com is not responsible for its readers’ comments.
  • Comments that are abusive, incendiary or irrelevant are strictly prohibited.
  • Please use a genuine email ID and provide your name to avoid reject.