Hey! You're No Sikh.

The Six Million Dollar Question

Recently, I was looking for material on Sikhnet to share with students in my Sikh Studies class. I had, only that morning, been telling them how successful the Sikhs were in the world, especially in Canada. “We even have Sikh MP’s, and a recent Prime Minister in British Columbia had been a Sikh (Dosanjh). Then I spotted this post of a Canadian Sikh MP visiting Punjab. Couldn’t believe my luck.

Clicking on it, I was absolutely delighted to see, that it was a Sikh lady, Dr Ruby Dhalla M.P from Brampton, Ontario. What better example could I have used to demonstrate my point. She was so elegantly dressed too. Be perfect to raise the self esteem of the girls in my class, not to mention the boys! Besides all that, it was just the kind of material I needed to show the youngsters in my care that it was long overdue that Sikhs let go of the last 3 centuries and learn to move on into a new world. Rebranding and remarketing are my buzz-words these days with all my parchaar work, even in Malaysian gurdwaras.

Then I came to the comments column. There were loads of people who were full of praise for Dr. Ruby, her work and her style, her elegance. Then there were the dinosaurs. Oh don’t we have our fair share. This lot are probably so busy hitting the keys on their computers everyday, running down anybody and everybody who doesn’t look like them that they have probably never stopped to see where the planet had spun itself to since 1469, the year Guru Nanak was born!

I read some of that stuff. Not all, I admit. At my age, I, like many others, am tired of these people and their inability to progress. This is what I have to say.

Firstly, I wish Guru Nanak Sahib Ji and Guru Gobind Singh were still around. I’m sure, although I could still be wrong, that these folks would then stop judging and damming innocent people.

Next, I have to say that I can’t blame these guys as they are probably just regular Joe’s just doing their job, which by the way, is ‘Protecting the Purity of Sikhi’. I know this occupation well because we have some of these professionals in Malaysia too! If you think about it, more Sikhs probably end up in hell than generally believed, because of this need to protect the purity, causing them to slander, discredit, insult, accuse, judge and condemn other God fearing Sikhs!

How about we take a history lesson together, so we can understand and learn the truth, or at least have some new input to a centuries old problem.

• A Lesson in History.
  
  To begin to unravel this mystery, we first have to understand ‘Who is Khalsa’. The word is Persian. It has two recognised meanings – (1) Pure and (2) All the lands and property that belonged directly to the king. Contrary to what you generally hear about Khalsa meaning ‘Pure’, it is the second, and not the first meaning, that is accepted by Sikh scholars. Khalsa means – ‘The King’s Own, the king here referring to God, Akaal Purakh, the King of Kings! (Tum ho sabh Rajan ke Raja. Aapeh aap gareeb nivajah).
  
  In 1699, all Sikhs were invited (not ordered) to become Khalsa. It is reported by the emperor’s own spies that 20,000 out of 80,000 able-bodied men, and some women took up the offer. The great Guru did not curse, criticize or condemn those who did not take up the offer! The Guru was just asking of His followers to take the fight to the rulers of India. He loved them all, Khalsa or not. And if you think about it properly, Guru Gobind Singh Ji had actually raised an army of Khalsa to defend, yes, the Sikhs, the folks who HAD NOT taken the Panj Kakari Amrit. Of course this was not the only reason.
  
  (BTW, the word Khalsa was used by Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji, well before it was used by Guru Gobind Singh Ji. Actually, it was even used earlier than that. There is a verse in the Holy Granth written by Bhagat Kabir, where the word Khalsa is used! Mind you, Kabir lived even before Guru Nanak Sahib!). it is the first line on page 655.

khu kbIr jn Bey Kwlsy pRym Bgiq ijh jwnI ]4]3]

Says Kabeer, those humble people become pure - they become Khalsa - who know the Lord's loving devotional worship. ||4||3||

kaho kabeer jan bha-ay khaalsay paraym bhagat jih jaanee. ||4||3||

• The Khalsa were the Knights of the Guru’s table. The Khalsa, and not the Sikh, was required to wear the 5 K’s, their uniform, as an outward display of their status in society, and their will to fight state sponsored terrorism.
  
  History is witness that our Gurus always held every disciple dearly, Khalsa or Sikh. To understand, let’s use this analogy. Whenever America goes to war, a call goes out to the citizens to join the army. Many people sign up to fight for their country whenever the need arises, example now, when America is at war in Afganistan and Iraq. But those who don’t, are as much equal in every way to those who do. You don’t become any lesser a citizen if you did not sign up! And Sikhs have to understand this and stop treating those not Khalsa as some kind of second class citizens! We are all just as privileged, being the disciples of the holy Guru. Those who seek greater strength choose to join the ranks of the Khalsa.
  
  Now, with Khalsa explained, let us take a look at who a Sikh is. A Sikh is simply one who
• Believes in and worships the one God, Akaal Purakh.
• Believes in the divinity of the 10 Gurus (Prophets) of Sikhdom
• Believes in the Holy Granth as the living testament of the ‘Perfect Light’, the eternal light of God (Satguru)
  
  This clearly means that anyone who believes in the above, without any reservation, is a Sikh of the Guru. Notice, that there is no mention of turbans or long hair. Notice also that there is no mention of any requirement to wear kakaars. That specifically is the code for a Khalsa, and clearly, that cannot be disputed. To be a Khalsa, one must bear all 5 kakaars. But to be a Sikh, one only needs to satisfy the three conditions listed above. Now, I am ready to enquire from those ‘protectors of the purity’ what gives them the right to question if somebody is Sikh or not. Just because in the centuries past it was natural for Sikhs to wear long hair or turbans doesn’t mean that today anyone who doesn’t wear them is not a Sikh, or anyone who dresses elegantly in western dress is not a Sikh? The Rehat Maryada then goes on to include a fourth condition. But it is very vague. Whether intentional or accidental, I can't say. it seems that the authors of the document did not fully appreciate the implication of that fourth statement. They cannot be blamed for it, because a hundred years ago, no one would have been able to foretell where things are going to end up and what the landscape is going to look like.

{ I must be up front and acknowledge that here is a fourth condition that says - A Sikh must place faith (nischa) in the Amrit of Guru Gobind Singh. What is unclear here is (1) Does it mean that every Sikh must take the Panj Kakaari Amrit. Or is it enough to just respect and believe in the greatness of the Amrit without having to take it? Which is it?

I believe that the authors, being wise men, understood that it is perfectly possible for people to be staunch Sikhs without necessarily wanting to join the Orthodox fraternity. Isn't that exactly like in 1699? (Of course there must have been millions of such Sikhs in 1936 when the Rehat Maryada Document was being formalised.) As a result, they framed this condition the way it stands. It was intentional, not accidental. This condition was designed to be 'Inclusive" and not 'Exclusive'. It aims to include the non Amritdhari folks, not exclude them!

From all this it can be deduced that Panj Kakaari Amrit was a condition specifically for the Khalsa. Sikhs already existed since the time of Guru Nanak. Guru Gobind Singh was creating a military fraternity within the greater community. What He was defining was for them. And in hindsight, we can see that to bundle the code (rehat) for Sikh and Khalsa into the same Rehat Nama is an error, which may lead us to difficult circumstance. As I will explain later, the words Sikh and Khalsa are not loosely interchangeable. Therefore, it would be more relevant and useful to have a new format for the Rehat Maryada. It could be specifically designed for the Sikh, ie, non Amritdhari Khalsa, but to have a section inside that addresses the Khalsa's special status and unique requirements and of his/her obligations. }

To summarise

– if you are wearing 5 kakaars, you are a Khalsa. If you are wearing only 4, you are not. You are then, simply a Sikh. AND THAT ALSO APPLIES if you are not wearing any kakaars. As long as you satisfy the above three conditions of being a Sikh! Ekk Akaal, Dass Guru, aur Guru Granth vich vishwaas! ( its another matter if people are going to argue that how can someone claim to have faith in ‘Dass Guru’ when they do not obey Guru Gobind Singh ji’s instruction to take Amrit. My answer will be very simple – if Guru Ji had in 1699, told all those who did not take Amrit when invited, that He was no longer their Guru, then I would accept their argument. But not only does history not mention any such thing, our Guru’s actions of defending all, providing for all, and sacrificing for all speak so loud that no one will ever be able to raise such arguments.

My readers are requested to understand the logic of the argument. Yes, it may not be what you are familiar with. We may have to unlearn what we have been told all our life, and consider what i have written . You must question what you have been taught before, just as you will question what I am telling you now.

Why I am making such a big fuss about this and going to great lengths to explain; because the survival of the Sikh and Khalsa Panth may very well depend on it. Let me remind you that today, only 20 % of Sikhs have so called ‘sikhi saroop’. (In another blog, I have already clarified that technically speaking, there is no such thing as ‘Sikhi Saroop”. For the same reason as explained here – Guru only specified a Khalsa Saroop. And I would have to ask, what then is ‘Sikhi Saroop’, one K, two K’s, three K’s or is it 4 K’s?

We have to clarify that everybody is still very much Sikh even if not Khalsa. If we don’t, we could end up being a religion of less than two million adherents, down from twenty five. So my free advice to those who so happily shoot from the hip. Beware of what you are doing. If your understanding is flawed, others should not have to pay the price. Be careful with your words and watch your criticism.

Let’s start putting the picture together. Even if someone does not satisfy any of the criteria of the 5 kakaars, they are every inch a Sikh, provided they satisfy the three conditions of being a Sikh. Thousands of Punjabis fall in this category, especially those who come from Hindu families in the Punjab. They don’t wear any kakaar but they are as Sikh as they come. Same goes for the thousands of Sindhis, especially those in Pakistan, not to mention the Gujeratis, a number of whom I met in Madrid, Spain. Every wall of the home I visited there was covered with pictures of the Gurus and of the Golden Temple. Every table, cabinet and car was overflowing with kirtan cassettes. In the name of Guru Nanak, I have not seen so much Sikhi in any Punjabi Sikh’s home as I saw in the homes of those Gujerati Sikhs in Madrid! And all of my Punjabi brothers and sisters better remember that the next time you are tempted to run down someone just because they have short hair or is dressed in an evening gown, you’d better think first!

( Please look out here for a video I shot of this wonderful community in the outskirts of the city of Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia. will post it soonest.)

A Bombshell?

While I am on the subject, I might as well drop another bombshell. I must warn you that this will be quite technical. Ready? Here goes:

There is no difference between a Sikh and a Sehajdhari Sikh. All Sikhs are Sehajdharis. And all Sehajdharis are full fledged Sikhs. Explanation: There are only two types of disciples of the holy Gurus - Sikhs or Khalsa. If you have not taken your Khalsa Amrit, you are a Sikh. Period. All the other labels of Amritdhari, Keshadhari, Sehajdhari, Mona etc, have no place in the Sikh Panth. if you are not a Khalsa. you are simply, a Sikh! If you have taken your Khalsa Amrit, you are Khalsa. If you have not, you are Sikh.

A person who wears long hair and a kara is still NOT an Amritdhari until and unless they have taken the Amrit Baptism from the Panj Piareh! Therefore, we are ‘Sehajdhari’. You see, unlike implied by some that there is a clear yet subtle category between being Keshadhari (implying that i may not have taken my Khalsa Amrit but at least i still have my long hair) and being Sehajdhari, I will have to say that there is absolutely no evidence to support this. There is no difference between a Keshadhari who has not taken His/her Khalsa Amrit, and a Sehajdhari. It surprises me that for centuries, the Sikh panth has been functioning as if there WAS a difference between the Keshadhari who has yet to take Amrit, and the Sehajdhari. They conveniently claim that Sikh refers to those who may not be Khalsa, but have their hair unshorn, ie, Keshadhari Sikhs. Now where did that come from? You are either a Sikh or a Khalsa. You have either taken the baptism or you haven’t. Where did that third category come from?

Since I have stated this, I might as well go on to remove any stigma the word ‘Sehajdhari’ might have. Yes, unfortunately, it does have some. People in the past have been using it as a kind of ‘talk down’ at others who cut their hair etc etc. Its like saying - because I don’t cut my hair, I’m a better Sikh than you. I am still a Sikh ie Keshadhari, but you are a ‘sehajdhari’ Sikh. That argument is not sustainable. It cannot be supported by anything in the Sikh religion! Everyone who is NOT YET Khalsa (Amritdhari), is sehajdhari. And no one should feel bad because being referred to as a Sehajdhari is not a slur. Its simply one of the most misunderstood words in the Sikh vocabulary.

The problem must have started when someone incorrectly translated the word ‘sehajdhari’ to mean ‘slow learner’, or, ‘slow to progress’ (from the word sehajeh sehajeh). Most Sikh writers have contributed to this problem by mistakenly or intentionally choosing this incorrect meaning. Whereas it is true that ONE of the meanings of this word is ‘unhurried’, that is not the one used in Gurbani. In Gurbani and Gurmukhi, sehaj means ‘pure grace’ or ‘in the grace of God’. Countless times in the Holy Granth, Sikhi itself is referred to as ‘Sehaj Dharm’, the ‘Dharma of Pure Grace’. What a beautiful description. Let me offer as an example how the word is used in the Holy Granth, from verses that are actually familiar to all, from the Lavaa of Anand Karaj – ‘Sehaj Anand ho-aa vadhbhagi ; By the Infinite Pure Grace, the fortunate ones (the Sikhs) have found celestial bliss. (it does not mean ‘slow bliss!!’). So, the good news is – it is perfectly OK to be a Sehajdhari. No one is trying to put you down!


Contrary to what we see happening in all Sikh documents and literature, the words Sikh and Khalsa are not freely interchangeable. They never were. Its like the example i always give. the citizens of America are Americans. the soldiers of America are Americans. But you cannot expect the citizens of America to go around dressed or living to the code of the soldiers. That analogy must be clearly understood by all Sikhs, before a healthy understanding and acceptance can happen. And this must happen before the sickly panth can be restored to good health. People's expectations must become realistic. If anyone out there believes that the 80% of Sikhs who no longer have 'saroop' are suddenly going to go back to it, they probably also believe in Santa Claus!

It’s just that when the Rehat Nama’s were first written in 1936, almost the entire population of Sikhs was Keshadhari. It was so easy to have missed the fine print. There was no visible difference between a Sikh and a Khalsa. Everyone wore turbans, or chunnis and Karas and outwardly looked the same. Hence, this problem of no clarity on the subject. But now, times have changed. It is only now we reach a point where we have to address the fact that as Sikhi goes around the world, to the different countries and the different cultures, we have to accommodate those who are not Khalsa and also do not have the traditional outward appearance that every Sikh used to have maybe 50 years ago!

Existing Sikhs without the saroop, and new converts WILL HAVE TO BE ACCOMODATED AS FULL FLEDGED SIKHS, WHATEVER FORM THEY MAY BE IN. even if they are not wearing a single kakaar! THIS POSITION IS NOT NEGOTIABLE. No one has any right to dictate to another how their Sikhi should manifest, as long as they satisfy the three conditions

Sikh parcharaks, thinkers, writers etc have to loosen up, not keep tightening the passages and doors to the Guru. Its not emotion, but maturity and wisdom that must prevail. As mentioned earlier, the defination of Sikh does not have any precondition of external appearance. And there has to be what I will call ‘Entry Level Sikhi’. Not everyone in the world can become a Khalsa overnight. Sometimes not even in a lifetime. But that does not mean that they can’t be Sikhs.

Right here in Malaysia we have many south Indians and Chinese who join our worship, recite Mool mantra and Gurmantra. We also have Sikhs of indigenous origins (great grand children of the first Sikhs to arrive from India with the British, in the nineteenth century, who married local women instead of returning to Punjab to seek brides), who practise a Sikh lifestyle without ANY saroop. It is interesting how their uncles and aunties are Christian or Muslim, but they are staunch Sikhs. They have every right to being Sikh. No one has any right to take that away from them. And that is the angle I am coming from.

Religion and dharma are about opening our hearts to humanity, not shutting people out at our whims and fancies. Be careful, how quick we are to reject people without having any idea of the big picture, and how our narrow minded judgements will put people off and turn even people who are Sikh by birth, away. You are not doing yourself and this tiny struggling religion any good. You are actually going against the grain of Sikhi by doing that.

Time for a little Test.

This is a good spot to remember an event from the life of the great Guru Gobind Singh. Read the follwing Sakhi and answer the questions that follow.

A Hindu of the untouchable caste of ‘kalaal’ desired very much to become a Sikh of the guru. At an opportune moment, he came for darshan, hoping and praying for acceptance. Suddenly, when just a few steps away from the Guru's throne, he froze in his tracks. The Guru, knower of all hearts, called out to him and encouraged him to come forward, whereupon the lowly man said the following words that are now immortalised in Sikh history – “Prabhu, I cannot approach you , for I am a lowly kalaal. The Guru smiled, walked up to him, embraced him and said – “You are no longer a kalaal. From now on, you are a Guru-ka-Laal”. (Laal is the Punjabi word for ‘Ruby’, sometimes more priceless than diamonds!). Now you please do the math.

Q: Do you think Sikhi is an exclusive or inclusive religion? ie, does Sikhi seek to exclude people or include them?

Q: What do you think the Guru will have to say to all these ‘holier than everyone else’ types who point at others and say that they are not Sikhs.

What a wonderful finale. One of the most eminent and widely acclaimed Sikhs today are none other than Dr. Harbans Lal Ph.D. Notice, his name doesn’t even have a Singh to it. Dr. Harbans Lal, is a Guru-ka-Laal too. He is a perfect example of the free, liberal and modern message of Guru Nanak’s Sikhi. Google to get an idea of who this great Sikh is, and do read his amazing work on Sikhism.

Considering that there are only 25 million Sikhs in the world today, one would have thought that Sikhs would be reaching out to anyone to declare them Sikhs. But typical of us idiotic Punjabis, even being so few has not made us realise that we should be making Sikhi an inclusive faith instead of an exclusive one. Look at Mr Odinga, who has challenged Mr Kibaki for the post of president of Kenya. From halfway across the world, he pulled a rabbit out of a hat, by suddenly declaring Mr Obama, the Democrat hopeful of the presidency of the United States, as ‘his long lost cousin’ (“my uncle’s son!”). What people will do to reach more people!12

We could learn a thing or two from Mr Odinga. We should be walking the streets of the world, slipping on Karas on as many hands as we can reach and telling people – “See. Now you too are a Sikh!” We could call it the Kara Krusade! But some Sikhs are so busy excluding everyone from the Sikh panth that very soon, they and their friends will be the only Sikhs left in the world! Then they’ll probably be well pleased with themselves, protecting the purity and all.

Coming back to Dr Ruby, let me say this; I admire you, my students in Sri Dasmesh School admire you. I am proud of you, that you are my Sikh sister and that you are a leader of the people in your country. I don’t care if you are not perfect. Neither am I, even though I have been in Sikh ministry for the last 30 years! May the Holy Guru bless the panth with thousands more women like you.

I look forward to the day I will meet up with you. I want to invite you to my country Malaysia, that my Sikh sisters can be inspired by you. I shall pray for your every success.

Important Notes.

Very important and generally unknown data is provided here for the reader to contemplate.

A further reason why Sikhs must change their attitude is provide in a book called 'Travels of Guru Nanak' by Prof. Surinder Singh Kohli. Funded by his university, the Panjab University, Chandigarh where he was the head of the Dept. of Punjabi, he undertook research and through travel along the actual routes taken by Guru Nanak, he published a book detailing amazing stuff unknown to probably even the most serious students of Sikhi.

I reproduce here bits from pg 160 and 161, the part when Guru Nanak was in what we today call Uzbekistan.

*In the city of Bukhara, there is a memorial of the Guru by the side of a spring which is said to have flowed by his blessings. Bhai Mardana, to quench his thirst had gone to ask for water at the place of a Muslim faqir named Afzal Qadri. As with Wali Qandari at todays Panja Sahib, the faqir refused it. The Guru then gave his staff to Bhai Bala and asked him to walk to a river which flowed at Vakand, a distance of twelve miles. From the river bank there, he was to draw a line all the way back to where the Guru was. It is said that the river followed Bhai Bala as he drew the line. It is the water of that river that flows through the spring in Bukhara. the people of the city still remember and relate to all visitors, the visit of Guru Nanak, until this day.

There is also a Dharamsala there in memory of the Guru. It is said that Sikhs installed the Holy Granth in this Dharamsala in 1858. Up to Bukhara, several Sikh merchants are found!

Then the Guru actually also went to visit Vakand. There, another Pir, Bhav Din who belonged to this place, became his diciple. The Pir was gifted a 'chola' (shirt top) and a 'seli topi' (a woollen head covering) by Guru Nanak. The reader would be pleased to know that this special dress is still worn up to this day by the faqirs of the school of Pir Bhav Din.

Even more facinating is the fact that they still recite the Japji daily, in their own language. Their name for the Japji Sahib is 'Behr-i-Tawil and they think of Guru Nanak as their only spiritual preceptor. Another spring commemorates the visit of the holy Guru to this spot. Near the tomb of Pir Bhav Din can be still seen the tree which grew from the staff of Guru Nanak, which was planted there!

Another town , Karmine, along the route from Vakand, was also visited by the Holy Guru. The people of this place are only devoted to Guru Nanak whom they call 'Wali Hind'.

The book then goes on to other facinating revelations. If you are interested, get a copy. Too much to relate here.

Fellow Sikhs, there are followers of Sikhi in its various forms in many more places than just the Punjab. It is our policies of excluding everyone out of our ignorance that doesn't allow Sikhi to grow and become a true world religion.

Satnam