Why Osama resembles Bhindranwale

Status
Not open for further replies.

The Ominous

Come get Some......




On the eve of the 1971 war between India and Pakistan, I was posted in Punjab. My battalion of Gorkhas was located at Ambala and had the task of defending a section of the border north of Amritsar.
I had never been to the Golden Temple and took the first opportunity to visit the shrine. Being a compulsive smoker, I had a packet of cigerettes on me. At the entrance itself I was told to deposit the packet in the locker and then go ahead.
During my first visit to this holiest Sikh shrine, I heard the shabad kirtan (devotional songs) being sung from the first floor of the Harmandir Sahib. Being an avid fan of Indian classical music, for me it was a treat to listen to some of the finest music, that too free.
From this time onwards, whenever I was passing through Amritsar I made it a point to visit the Golden Temple and spend some time there. It was always a rewarding experience.
It was quite common to see, at that time, that Hindu visitors to the Golden Temple far outnumbered Sikhs on a normal day. In my army days most of my close friends were Sikhs and therefore one was quite familiar with Sikh rituals and often visited gurdwaras as a matter of course on Sundays.
But less than 13 years later, I found myself again in Punjab, this time on the unpleasant duty of dealing with terrorists who thought that pulling out Hindus from buses and gunning them down mercilessly was their highest religious duty. As a participant in the painful but necessary Operation Bluestar, I can vouch that when General K Sundarji said that the Indian Army entered the Golden Temple with a prayer on�its lips, he echoed the sentiments of all of us.
Today, when the memory of those nightmare years seems distant, there is an attempt to give a very different colour to the whole episode. Gulzar did that quite effectively with his film Maachis. The tragic consequences of that were seen in the suicide of a Sikh police officer�(former�Tarn Taran superintendent of police A S Sandhu)�who had dealt with terrorism. It is therefore time for all Indians to understand the truth that led to a ten-year bloodbath in Punjab and not attempt to glorify the terrorists under the garb of human rights.
Most analysts agree that the troubles in Punjab began with the Nirankari-Sikh clash that took place on April 13, 1978, in Amritsar. The Nirankaris are a heretic cult that violates the basic tenets of Sikhism and yet claims to be part of the Panth. Forty protesters died in that clash and a feeling spread that the government was supporting the Nirankaris. It is noteworthy that at that time Punjab was being ruled by the Akalis. The violent movement that began initially as an anti-Nirankari agitation soon turned against the government and, later, Hindus.
The origins of the Punjab crisis and Sikh separatism go back to the British days. As in the case of Muslims, giving Sikhs a separate identity, not religious but political, was a part of the divide and rule policy. But the trauma of the partition of Punjab did much to wash off that myth and the Sikhs returned to the Indian mainstream.
The Akalis often used the slogan of 'Sikh Panth in danger' (not unlike the Muslim League's equally false and disastrous slogan of Islam in danger!) to garner votes, but consistently failed in their attempts. Sikhs, by the dint of sheer hard work, prospered and came to occupy a dominant position in many fields, including in the armed forces. A distinction needs to be clearly made between a distinct religious identity and political separatism based on religion.
Why then did Punjab erupt in the 1980s?
Several explanations have been offered. Some attributed it to the deprivation of the masses in spite of the Green Revolution. Others felt that the Akali frustration at their inability to attain political power (as the SC/ST Sikhs and Hindus combined to support the Congress) was at the root of the violence. Machinations by Indira Gandhi, who was credited with having deliberately created Sikh militancy to gather frightened Hindu votes, has also been floated as a serious theory.
But none of these explanations suffices to understand the widespread support that militancy enjoyed at its peak. To understand this phenomenon, one has to go back to the decade of the 1960s and the Green Revolution.
In 1965, when the US effectively used food aid to browbeat India, Indira Gandhi and her dynamic minister in charge of food and agriculture, C Subramaniam, fashioned a strategy to attain food self-sufficiency in the shortest possible time frame. The irrigated lands of Punjab, Haryana, and Western Uttar Pradesh were targeted for application of miracle seeds, fertilizers and mechanisation.
The strategy succeeded and India became self-sufficient in foodgrain. But rising incomes and mechanisation brought in their wake social tensions.
In the hard work that intensive agricultural operations involved, the turban and the beard were seen as a hindrance. Sikhs in large numbers took to trimming or even shaving their beards and cutting their hair, both against the tenets of the Khalsa (pure) Panth. The hair and the beard are not mere external symbols for a Sikh, but a major part of his identity.
Worse, many took to smoking, a taboo in the Sikh ethos. A district like Amritsar, which has a majority Sikh population, became the highest revenue-earning district for cigarette companies. 'Paani piyo pump da te cigarette piyo Lamp da' was a catchy slogan that linked the smoking of Red Lamp cigarettes with water from the 'pump', subtly linked this symbol of the Green Revolution with smoking.
In travels through Punjab as an army officer, one was always welcomed with open arms. It was also common to share the charpoy and lassi with the farmers. During all these encounters, one frequently heard a lament from Sikh elders that at the rate at which people were deserting the faith, in a few years there would be no Sikhs left in Punjab.
The relationship between Sikhs and Hindus was such that the moment a Sikh shaved his beard and cut his hair, he became a Hindu. Sikh society felt insecure at the assault of this 'modernisation' and feared for the survival of its identity. This feeling was not confined to the villages but was commonplace even among the Sikh intelligentsia.
In this situation of fear and foreboding arrived Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale with his single-point programme of strict adherence to the Sikh symbols. His campaign against trimming of hair and shaving of beards found a groundswell of support amongst the Sikh masses. And he enforced his dictates with ruthless force.
His violent methods brought him into direct confrontation with the State and soon militancy began in Punjab.
But 'modernisation', the real threat, is a formless entity. So the violence first targeted the Nirankaris, then the government machinery, and then the Hindus. In the final stages, the terrorists turned increasingly against the Sikhs themselves and became predatory. It is at this stage that the militants lost support and were finally overcome towards 1993.
The situation was tailormade for Pakistan. It intervened with a generous supply of arms and ammunition and mayhem began in right earnest. The US and the UK also saw in this an opportunity to destabilise India, their long-term goal during the Cold War. The West used expatriate Sikhs as an instrument of its policy and gave shelter and support to all manner of terrorist groups.
Indira Gandhi saw this as a direct challenge to India's very existence and eventually decided to act, leading to Operation Bluestar. The rest, as they say, is history.
There is an uncanny resemblance in this to the Islamist terrorism that the world is witnessing today. Like Sikhism then, Islam today is afraid of modernisation and Westernisation. This also explains the wide support terrorists enjoy in the Muslim world. Osama bin Laden is a spitting image of Bhindranwale.
Like Sikh terrorism, the current wave of Islamist terror will subside once the terrorists turn predatory (as their recent attacks in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan indicate) and lose popular support. Only then will the world be able to deal with this modern scourge. Punjab does offer a valuable lesson.
 

rockaclimba

Member
This never occurs to me. But I liked your post. What I think about the whole paradox is : Once again we were taken for a big ride by DELHI. And still, they are our masters. Still, they gets richer and richer and we are becoming.....going nowhere....

Perhaps, this is destiny of PUNJAB- we could never get united. I do not have any hope or dream from WHITE BEARDS...all I see forward is GENERATION - X.
They seems to be more practical than OLD STUFF and I am sure one day we will be able to live humanly. Till then, we all should pray to our GODS. We require all of them.
 

Ramta

Member
- -
- -

Chohan: end of an era - KHUSHWANT SINGH


The death last month of Dr Jagjit Singh Chohan (79) in his village, Tanda, reminded me of his case against me and my encounter with the other protagonists of a separate Sikh state, notably Ganga Singh Dhillon, Gurmeet Singh Aulakh and Simranjeet Singh Mann. I never met Chohan but he took me to court in London and Chandigarh. He had set up an Embassy of the Republic of Khalistan in London, with a Nihang guarding the entrance. He issued passports and currency notes of Khalistan. He made Sikhs a laughing stock. I wrote about him in volume II of my A History of the Sikhs. He claimed that I had libelled him and asked for damages of over a million pounds sterling from my publishers and me.

It was trial by jury. Chohan attended the hearings everyday, taking with him a few patriarchs with long, flowing beards. He produced some witnesses, including an English woman, Joyce Pettigrew, author of Robber Noblemen, a book on Sikh zamindars I had rubbished in my columns. I could not travel to London but sent affidavits signed, among others, by President Zail Singh, S.J.S. Chhatwal, retired high commissioner of Canada, and a couple of old fellow villagers of Chohan to the effect that as a young man he had not conformed to the Khalsa tradition of wearing his hair and beard unshorn.

The judge put two questions to the jury: Had I libelled Chohan? If so, what damages would they award to him? To the first question, the jury affirmed that I had libelled Chohan. To the amount of damages to be given to Chohan, the jurors fixed the amount at one penny. Chohan claimed victory. He never asked me for the one penny he had won. I still owe him a penny. I’ve no idea what came of the case he had some relation of his filed against me in Chandigarh.

I have strong views on the claim of a separate, sovereign state for Sikhs or any similar demand for an independent state to be carved out of India. I belong to the Sikh community but regard Khalistanis as the worst enemies of the Khalsa Panth and traitors to the country. I have often challenged them to draw me a map of what they conceive as Khalistan, in which Sikhs will have as much of a majority as they do in Punjab today. Not one has taken up my challenge. Twenty per cent of the community live outside Punjab: farmers in Ganganagar district of Rajasthan and the Terai in Uttarakhand, Sikh industrialists, professionals, and tradesmen prosper in all parts of the country. What will become of them if, god forbid, they get away with a Sikh state? Another mass immigration of refugees?

They never answer these questions because they never bother to think about them. They are singularly brainless and unconcerned about the future of the community. Another Khalistani, Simranjit Singh Mann, won his election to the Lok Sabha but refused to enter it because he was not allowed to carry a kirpan of the length he wanted. No other Sikh MP before or after him found that a problem.

Gurmeet Singh Aulakh and Ganga Singh Dhillon continued to live in Washington. Aulakh used to issue bulletins in support of Khalistan. (He sent me some in which he had written something nasty about me). He has fallen silent. Dhillon lives in a large house overlooking Potomac River. I had a long luncheon session with him. I advised him to change his name and that instead of polluting the Ganga, he should pollute the Potomac.

The demand for Khalistan met the fate it deserved. It died an ignominious death. But let it be a lesson to others who periodically make noises about separating the states in which they live from India. We have heard them in Bengal, Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra. They are voices of treason which the people themselves should silence.


Thanks

- -
- -
 
hehehehhe 22 janta(anti sikh activists, u can find easily in rss propeganda) ajjkal khuswant singh dian quotes noo chah ke laindi aa..............aa ik article aa......khushwant singh bare baldev singh da jis wich usne khuswant singh di asliat liki aa......khuswant singh da father "sir sobha singh"........khuswant singh indra gadhi da chela.......kangrsi chamcha......ate kangras di sikh neeti ki c ate aa oh sabh nu pata hi aa......hai taan kush lengthy par interesting aa......main v copy paste kita kiton......par ih sach aa yaar


The Changing Interpretation of Khushwant Singh

FPRIVATE "TYPE=PICT;ALT=baldev"



by Baldev Singh

This write-up is prompted for the following reasons:
First, in the India Tribune (Chicago) of September 20, 2002 Niaranjan Shah asserted that Sikhs are Hindus. To support his claim he quoted Khushwant Singh’s writings and the Indian Constitution, which claims that Sikhs are Hindus. However, the editor ignored my rebuttal to this absurd claim (Indian Media and Minorities, SikhSpectrum, November 2003). Hindu intellectuals and media take delight in deriding Sikhs and Sikhism.<SUP>1 The Sikhs rancor in the eyes of Hindu elite as they remind them of their humiliating past, from the time of the expedition of Mohammad Bin Qasim to Sindh in 710 to the departure of the British from India in 1947.
The Hindu elite have become masters of manipulation, deception and hypocrisy. To hide their pain and sense of shame, they console and entertain themselves by ridiculing Sikhs and other minorities. In contrast to the degrading and humiliating history of the Hindus, the history of Sikhs is a saga of sacrifices to uphold the principles of Nanakian philosophy of universal humanism.

Unlike the Hindu elite who used to prostrate before the mighty Mughals and sing paeans eeshvro va dilishvro va, (The emperor of Delhi is as great as God), 2 the Sikhs fought against both the tyranny of caste ideology and the oppression of Muslim rulers. With dogged determination and firm faith in the sovereignty3 bestowed upon them by the tenth Nanak, Guru Gobind Singh, they succeeded in defeating the combined forces of caste ideology and the mighty Mughals and established the Khalsa (Sikh) rule over a vast tract of Northwestern India.4

Second, in his interview with J. S. Tiwana, Khushwant Singh made some outrageous statements: "Sikh are kesadhari-Hindus. Their religious source is Hinduism. Sikhism is a tradition developed within Hinduism. Guru Granth Sahib reflects Vedantic philosophy and Japji is based on the Upanishads. Unity of God and casteless society etc. was also preached by other Vaisnava Bhagats."

"But in your earlier works you had stated that Sikhism is a blend of Hinduism and Sufism," countered Tiwana. "Yes, McLeod’s works did change my thinking.5 A scholar must keep his mind open," replied Singh.

However, when someone calls a Sikh a kesadhari-Hindu, he is ever ready to unseath his sword to avenge the insult.6 On the other hand the editor of an international Sikh publication, the Sikh Review – Saran Singh – devoted the entire Feburary 2003 issue to the writings of Khushwant Singh to project and promote him as a great Sikh scholar. Moreover, Saran Singh trampled over journalistic ethics by publishing the sanitized version of Tiwana’s interview by removing the outrageous statement "Sikh are kesadhari-Hindus."7 The man who calls Sikhs as kesadhari-Hindus is being promoted as a great Sikh scholar! This creates confusion in the minds of ordinary Sikhs!

Third, there are too many "me too writers / scholars" nowadays whose knowledge of Sikhism is limited to what they have learned on their grandparents knees, from their favorite Sant / Babas . And such writers / scholars also rely on Khushwant Singh’s writings on Sikhism. Under these circumstances it is urgent and desirable that Khushwnat Singh’s statements in his interview with Tiwana are tested on the touchstone of Aad Guru Granth Sahib, which is the only authentic source of the Sikh faith.

To understand Khushwant Singh’s current views about Sikhism, it is important to first know his background. He is probably the most well-known and popular journalist in India. So whatever he writes, whether right or wrong and fact or fiction is published. When he was the editor of the Illustrated Weekly of India, he startled a Hindi writer by asserting that his mother tongue is English. Little did the naïve Hindi writer realize that Khushwant Singh is the son of Sir Sobha Singh? He was educated in the English medium. He studied law in England and practiced law for few years in the Lahore Court. However, his heart was in some place else – in journalism. He has been working as a journalist since 1951.

In his earlier days Singh was a bold and straightforward guy who didn’t hesitate speaking the truth. It was Khushwant Singh who used to arrange Master Tara Singh’ press conferences with foreign journalists. However, in the 1960s he underwent a change and while trying to please politicians lost his sense of objectivity. During the Emergency imposed by Indra Gandhi (1975), he was not only her strongest supporter but also used to serenade her son Sanjay and his wife Menaka, whom he regarded as his orally adopted daughter (munh boli dhi). Later he wrote a book with juicy tales about the Gandhi family including Menaka. Outraged Menaka took him to the court to stop the publication of the book.

During the Government sponsored murder and rape of Sikhs, and the looting and burning of their properties after the assassination of Indra Gandhi, Khushwant Singh saved himself by hiding in the Swedish Embassy, and he described the events as a pogrom. Khushwant Singh, who considers English as his mother tongue, later changed pogrom to "riot." In his columns he frequently extols the virtues of Mahatma Gandhi – peace and nonviolence. However, he had no compunction in travelling all over Punjab with KPS Gill – a sadistic killer -- exhorting police officials to kill "the bastards."

They stopped at the dera of Baba Thakar Singh of Dadami Taksal to seek his blessing. At a press conference he vigorously defended the extra-judicial killing of Sikhs by saying "police had no option but to take law into their own hands." Reacting to this abomination Col. Partap Singh remarked,


<DIR>"Khushwant Singh’s behavior is reminiscent of the 58 Jews holding senior jobs in the Nazi regime who gave approval to Hitler’s policy of extermination of Jews. The Jewish community remembers them as Judean rats." And he reminded Khushawant Singh that the UN General Assembly, in its resolution adopted in December 1989, had sought to stop this type of extra-judicial executions.8

</DIR>

Khushwant Singh didn’t believe that Sardar Jaswant Singh Khalra was a human rights activist. However, after reading Reduced to Ashes: The Insurgency and Human Rights in Punjab his dormant conscience suddenly woke up and whispered, "These stories are spine-chilling, the Punjab police has to do some explaining."9


What Khushwant Singh is doing is not new or unusual, as there were always people like him throughout human history. For example, during the Muslim rule, the Hindu elite used to call them malesh (polluted ones) privately, but praised the Emperor of Delhi as God in public.2 Similarly, after the conquest of Punjab by the British, some depraved people, at the behest of the British, concocted an absurd and profane story about Guru Tegh Bahadur. When Emperor Aurangzeb asked the Guru, "Why are you looking toward the South", he replied, "I am looking for my European Sikhs, who are going to destroy your kingdom".10 Sir Baba Khem Singh Bedi, other toadies, and ignorant preachers used to narrate this story to ignorant and gullible Sikhs. These people including the clergy, controlled by the British, used to call revolutionary Sikhs -- Gadharites and Babar Akalis who were fighting against the British -- as non-Sikhs.11,12

In the interview with Tiwana, Khushwant Singh remarked, "Chandu Lal Trivedi did not issue any directive to Punjab district authorities against criminal tendencies of the Sikh people, it is a figment of Kapur Singh’s imagination." May be Chandu Lal did not issue such a directive, but what Khushwant Singh did not tell Tiwana, is that Chnadu Lal Trivedi, like industrialist Parakh and Mohammad Ali Jinah, was a family friend of Khushwant Singh’s father Sir Sobha Singh.

Let us now examine Khushwant Singh’s arguments that Sikhs are kesadhari- Hindus and Sikhism is an offshoot of vaisnava bhakti
movement.

Hindu terminology in Aad Guru Granth Sahib (AGGS)

Singh cites McLeod’s observation13 that there is a preponderance of Hindu terminology versus Islamic terminology in AGGS. Of course it is true, but it does not in any way or manner prove that Sikhs are Hindus and Sikhism is rooted in Hinduism. The logical and obvious explanation for the preponderance of Hindu terminology in AGGS is that Guru Nanak grew up among Hindus and at that time when the Indian population was predominantly Hindu. It was with the Hindu audience that he had most of his religious discussions, debates and discourses. It was the Hindus to whom he preached most of the time, and it is natural that he used Hindu terminology to explain concepts.

However, the meaning of these words is not the same in Nanakian philosophy. Guru Nanak rejected the essentials of Hinduism and the moral authority of Hindu scriptures.14 He rejected the concepts of reincarnation, karma and transmigration, hell and heaven, and mokhsa (salvation).15 The names of Hindu gods like Ram, Krishan, Brahma, Vishnu and Mahesh in AGGS are used only for the "One and only – Supreme Being." There are rare personal references to Hindu gods who are depicted as mere mortals. For example:


<DIR>In exile, Ram bewailed when he was separated from Sita and Lachman. Even the Pandvas who lived in the company of their master (lord Krishna) were forced to do hard labor in destitution.
AGGS, M 1, p 953.
Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva are afflicted with self-centeredness (haumain) as the rest of the world.
Only those are free from this affliction, who have recognized the need to be one with God through meditation on the Word.
AGGS, M 1, p 1153.

</DIR>On the other hand, though there are far less references to Islamic terminology, the meaning of Islamic terms is essential the same. For instance -- Allah, Khuda, Rab, Rahim, Karim and Parvaradgar (God’s name) -- hukam (Divine order), raza (Will) and qudrat (nature), ardas (prayer) -- nadir, karam, mehar, tars and bakhshih (Divine grace). Moreover, words like Sardar or Sirdar (leader), Nihang (Akali Singh), fateh (victory), shahadat (martyrdom) and shaheed (martyr) are of Islamic origin and used in the same sense. Additionally, Guru Gobind Singh used the word Khalsa in the Arabic sense for the entire Sikh community when he abolished the massand system. The word massand is a derivative of the Persian word masnad (seat of authority).

The Sikh Gurus rejected Hindu gods and goddesses and the moral authority of Hindu scriptures.


<DIR>I have searched many Shastars and Simrtis; their teachings do not show the way to God.
But the dwelling on God’s attributes is invaluable.
AGGS, M5, p 265.
Many a Brahma got tired of studying Vedas, but they could not estimate even an iota of God’s greatness.
Ten incarnations of Vishnu and the famous ascetic Shiv who got tired of smearing his body with ashes, could not fathom God’s extent.
AGGS, M 5, p 747

</DIR>
Furthermore, Guru Nanak did not assign any specific name or gender to God. Sikhs continue to use "He" for God under the influence of other religions. God is most often described in adjectives emphasizing God’s ineffable nature. The Gurus accepted all names, people used for God. But God is the creator of the cosmos. God is beyond time and space, so what appropriate word or term could describe the Indescribable – the Ineffable One?


<DIR>O, The Primordial One, tongue describes You by the names people have given You, (but You are without any descriptive name). ‘Everlasting One’ is Your Primordial name.
AGGS, M 5, p 1083.

</DIR>Additionally, Guru Nanak rejected asceticism and celibacy. It is the householder who sustains human society, whereas an ascetic is a parasite. It is the householder who makes an honest living and practices charity that finds the path to God, not the ascetic who goes with a begging bowl to the householder for alms. "Never bow at the feet of the one who claims to be a great spiritual teacher, but goes begging for alms (AGGS, M, 1, p 1245). On the other hand, "One who works hard to make an honest living and practices charity finds the path to God (AGGS, M 1, p 1245).
The Sikh Gurus were champions of a householder’s life, and they emphasised and promoted it in their writings. The relationship between God and man is depicted in the imagery of family life. God is the husband and all human beings (men and women) are the spouse. God is also called father, mother, brother, friend and lover. Professor Puran Singh, the mystic poet – the spirit of a Sikh -- has summed up beautifully and succinctly the meaning of Hindu terminology present in AGGS.


<DIR>The words Brahman (Braham) and Para-Braham also come in Guru Granth, but as Cunningham says "by way of illustration only. Similarly, the names of all gods and goddesses of Brahminical Pantheon.16
It is to be regretted that Sikh and Hindu scholars are interpreting Guru Nanak in the futile terms of the color he used, the brush he took. They are analyzing the flesh of his words and dissecting the texts to find the Guru’s meaning to be the same as of the Vedas and Upanishads! Dead words are used to interpret the fire of the Master’s soul!16

</DIR>Upanishads and Japu (Japji)


A learned Hindu may find reference to Upanishads like a learned Muslim may find reference to Qur’an in Guru Nanak’s Japu. For example, commenting on the long bloody war between Muslim rulers and the Sikhs, poet Mohammed Iqbal observed, "Fault lies with the Muslim clergy who didn’t pay any attention to Guru Nanak’s works. Japu is essentially a commentary on Qur’an." Commenting on the victory of Khalsa forces over the Muslim rulers, Iqbal said, "The Khalsa snatched away the sword and Qur’an from the Muslims."17 People of other faith may make similar claims.

A colleague who shared the laboratory with me once asked, "Baldev, what is that mantra you often hum while working on your experiments? Does it really expedite your research work. Even I have learned a few words, my pronunciation may not sound good." "Stan, it is not a mantra, these are two verses from the composition of our fifth master, Guru Arjan Dev. They are about you and me and the whole humanity." "What do you mean." So, I explained him:


<DIR>Enmity to none and none is stranger, we get along with all.
AGGS, M 5, p 1299.
O my Beloved, all claim Your kinship, no one considers You as stranger.
AGGS, M 5, p 97.

</DIR>After a moment’s reflection, Stan exclaimed, "O, that’s the Bible!"

No wonder why non- Sikhs like George Bernard Shaw, novelist Pearl S. Buck, poet Mohammed Iqbal, historian Arnod Toynbee, Reverend H. L. Bradshaw and Swami Ram Tirath Danda Sanyasi recognized the teachings of Guru Nanak as a philosophy of universal humanism and Aad Guru Granth Sahib as the common heritage of mankind.

Besides, like all other Hindu scriptures, Upanishads also supports the validity of the caste system whereas AGGS repudiates the caste system categorically. According to Subal Upanishad, Brahman came from the mouth of Brahma, the Kashatrya from the shoulders, the Vaishya from the thighs, and Shudra from the feet.18

How did Khushwant Singh become an expert on Sikhism?

From the Gurbani verses often quoted in Khushwant Singh’s columns, it is quite evident that he has not studied AGGS seriously. His interpretation is usually literal and invariably wrong. He was a member of a team consisting of Dr. Gopal Singh, Dr. Trilochan Singh, Bawa Harkishan Singh and Kapur Singh, which translated selected portions of AGGS for UNESCO. I think Khushwant Singh was invited for his mastery of the English language, not for his knowledge and understanding of AGGS.

He is well known for his two volumes of History of Sikhs, though he has also authored several other books on Sikhism. Khushwant Singh’s thinking about Sikhism has almost undergone 180 degree change from his earliest writing to the more recent ones.32 In 1963, he recorded in his History of Sikhs that Nanak not only founded a new religion and started a new pattern of living, he also set in motion an agrarian movement whose impact was felt all over the country.33

In 1984, he wrote in the Punjab Story, "Being himself a Hindu was at the same time concerned with reforming Hinduism. But as the years went by and his message caught on among the masses, he decided to give his teachings permanency through a sect of his own sect."34

In 1991, in the Illustrated Weekly he stated: "Sikhism is an offshoot of Hinduism and is only distinguished from it by is external symbols of the Khalsa. The theology is entirely Hindu. Almost nine tenths of Guru Granth Sahib, composed largely by Guru Arjan is in fact Vedanta, and the essence of all you read in the Upanishads and the Gita."35 Similarly, in an entry in the Encyclopaedia Britanica (15th ed. Vol. 27) authored by him he observed, "Sikhism was historical development of the Hindu Vaisnava bhaktii movement – a devotional movement among the followers of god Vishnu – that began in the Tamil Country and was introduced to the North by Ramanuja."

I will leave up to historians to judge Khushwant Singh’s credentials as a historian and the quality of his works as source of Sikh history and Sikhism! However, I have no hesitation in stating that his History of Sikhs fails to give a clear picture of Sikh philosophy, its purpose and its accomplishments. On the other hand after reading his works, a serious student of Sikhism realizes the superfluous nature of Khushwant Singh’s understanding of Sikhism and his unprofessional and ugly attempt to distort Sikhism to advance his personal agenda.

A rejoinder to one of Khushwant Singh’s article is reproduced hereunder so that the readers can draw their own conclusions about his credentials as a Sikh scholar. In 1979, Khushwant Singh wrote the article Sikhs Elect their Mini-Lok Sabha in his fortnightly, New Delhi of April 16. This 3-4-page article contained many erroneous statements, misquoted adages, derogatory language and misinterpretations, but by chance it came to the notice of Professor Hazara Singh, Head, Department of Journalism, Punjab Agriculture University, Ludhiana.

Professor Hazara Singh sent a point-by-point rebuttal to Khushwant Singh. Khushwant Singh acknowledged his mistakes, however, refused to publish the rebuttal on the pretext that his was a casual write-up. Fortunately, Professor Hazarar Singh published both Khushwant Singh’ article and his rejoinder in the October issue of the Sikh Review of 1979. For the sake of brevity only the rejoinder is reproduced below.

Incorrect statements

i) The five Takhats are Akal Takhat Amritsar; Patna; Kesh Garh, Anadpur; Damdama, Talwandi Sabo and Hazur Sahib (Nanded) according to their historical order. Fatehgarh is not one of them.
ii) The State Legislature which passed the The Sikh Gurdwara Act (No. VIII, 1925) was called Punjab Legislative Council and not Punjab Legislative Assembly.
iii) The demarcation of Punjab on linguistic basis was announced in 1965, after the Indo-Pakistan conflict and not in 1964. The re-demarcated Punjab, wrongly quoted by many as Punjabi Suba (state), was not exclusively achieved as result of the agitation launched by Akali Dal.
After the repulsion of the attack by the Indian Army and threat posed by Pakistan Armored Corps to cut across the Khem Karan border in September 1965, there had been a thinking in New Delhi to have Indian forces retreated up to Beas and fight back Pakistan from that strategic position.
The Sikh officers pointed out that the surrender of Darbar Sahib, Amritsar to Pakistan would demoralize the Sikh soldiers and might result in a greater debacle at other fronts. It was Sikh peasantry of Amritsar, which helped maintain the supply line of disorganized Indian Defense Forces. It was reported to New Delhi that the Sikh women were playing a vital role in the struggle for survival by cooking meals for the army; VIPs from Delhi came incognito to verify that and went away convinced that the Sikhs would get what they had been agitating for. Khushwant Singh was at Los Angles then contemplating the draft of a communication, which he posted to President Ayub Khan from Hong Kong. The contempt with which his epistle was treated deserves to be extended to this contribution also.
iv) Khushwant Singh may like to ascertain whether Bakhshi Gopi Chand, father of Master Tara Singh was a Brahmin or a Khatri.
v) It was not Guru Ram Das, Nanak IV, who acquired the site of the present city of Amritsar. "In the time of Guru Amar Das, a site, about twenty-five miles from Goindwal was purchased. Bhai Jetha (who later was consecrated as Guru Ram Das) was sent there by the Guru. He built himself a small hut and started digging the tank. This is how the modern city of Amritsar began." (Harbans Singh and Lal Mani Joshi, An Introduction to Indian Religions, Punjabi University, Patiala, May 1973, P 220.)
vi) It is incorrect that after the annexation of the Sikh kingdom (Punjab) by the British in 1849, the English rulers won over the Sikh soldiery by taking them in the company’s forces and further rewarded them for their support during the Mutiny of 1857 by granting large tracts of land and privileges in the services.
"The Sikh assistance to the British has been misunderstood. In fact by and large the people in Punjab viewed the British Government with distrust and resentment. Disarming the entire Punjabi population had left them bereft of the means of self-defense. Many of the Sikh dignitaries who had taken part in fighting against the British were languishing in prison; many others were living under humiliating conditions. The lands of Jagirdars had been considerably cut down. The Khalsa Army having been disbanded, a large number of the erstwhile soldiers had been driven to the plough." (Fauja Singh, Who is Who – Punjab Freedom Fighters, Vol. I, Punjabi University Patiala, February 1972, p xii.)
The grant of large tracts of land to the Sikhs in the canal areas is a mere fancy. Solitary cases do not make a rule, but the land could be allotted to the peasantry only, which happened to be Sikh predominantly. An educationally backward peasantry could not be extended any privileges in the services, though that favor might have been bestowed on the offsprings of Nawabs, Rai Bahadurs and Sardards. No government takes into its services the soldiers of the once enemy ranks. Neither East India Company absorbed the Sikh soldiery, nor the National Government headed by Jawahar Lala Nehru reinstated the INA personnel, however patriotic they had been.

Conclusion

The discussion on Khushwant Singh’s views about Sikhism in this article unequivocally demonstrates that his utterances or writings are nothing more than a shear false propaganda of a tabloid journalist to advance his own agenda. Khuswant Singh is no different than his father. While hundreds of Sikhs kissed the gallows, hundreds were exiled to the isles of black waters and hundreds courted martyrdom in the Gurdwara Liberation Movement, Gadhar movement and Jallianwala Bagh to liberate India from the British yoke, Khuswant’s father, Sobha Singh became Sir Sobha Singh enriching himself and his progeny. Khuswant Singh is no different from Hindus who used to regard Mulim rulers as incarnation of God.
</SUP>
 

rockaclimba

Member
One striking similarity between two is that both were production of CENTRAL RULE of country to play some role of their choice.

I would like to quote SYDNEY SHELDON in SAND OF TIMES: Difference between a patriot and a terrorist is which of them is in rule.
 

hooneey

Well-known member
BAI i respect every bdy feelings, but very few ppl knw dat SANT bhindran wale really was a sant. HE WAS NOT AT ALL A TERRORIEST.
ohna choti ji umar ton hi sare paath aunde san.
oh tan kai mahan gurudawara sahib vich kirtan vi karde si.
once a doctor who was lookin after him was amazed to c dat sant sleep for few hours n always was doin his path.
he never possesd even a single penny(osama is a croran pati yaar)
SO SAY WATEVER BUT DONT COMPARE D PURE SOUL OF SANT JI WD A TERORIST.
 




On the eve of the 1971 war between India and Pakistan, I was posted in Punjab. My battalion of Gorkhas was located at Ambala and had the task of defending a section of the border north of Amritsar.
I had never been to the Golden Temple and took the first opportunity to visit the shrine. Being a compulsive smoker, I had a packet of cigerettes on me. At the entrance itself I was told to deposit the packet in the locker and then go ahead.
During my first visit to this holiest Sikh shrine, I heard the shabad kirtan (devotional songs) being sung from the first floor of the Harmandir Sahib. Being an avid fan of Indian classical music, for me it was a treat to listen to some of the finest music, that too free.
From this time onwards, whenever I was passing through Amritsar I made it a point to visit the Golden Temple and spend some time there. It was always a rewarding experience.
It was quite common to see, at that time, that Hindu visitors to the Golden Temple far outnumbered Sikhs on a normal day. In my army days most of my close friends were Sikhs and therefore one was quite familiar with Sikh rituals and often visited gurdwaras as a matter of course on Sundays.
But less than 13 years later, I found myself again in Punjab, this time on the unpleasant duty of dealing with terrorists who thought that pulling out Hindus from buses and gunning them down mercilessly was their highest religious duty. As a participant in the painful but necessary Operation Bluestar, I can vouch that when General K Sundarji said that the Indian Army entered the Golden Temple with a prayer on�its lips, he echoed the sentiments of all of us.
Today, when the memory of those nightmare years seems distant, there is an attempt to give a very different colour to the whole episode. Gulzar did that quite effectively with his film Maachis. The tragic consequences of that were seen in the suicide of a Sikh police officer�(former�Tarn Taran superintendent of police A S Sandhu)�who had dealt with terrorism. It is therefore time for all Indians to understand the truth that led to a ten-year bloodbath in Punjab and not attempt to glorify the terrorists under the garb of human rights.
Most analysts agree that the troubles in Punjab began with the Nirankari-Sikh clash that took place on April 13, 1978, in Amritsar. The Nirankaris are a heretic cult that violates the basic tenets of Sikhism and yet claims to be part of the Panth. Forty protesters died in that clash and a feeling spread that the government was supporting the Nirankaris. It is noteworthy that at that time Punjab was being ruled by the Akalis. The violent movement that began initially as an anti-Nirankari agitation soon turned against the government and, later, Hindus.
The origins of the Punjab crisis and Sikh separatism go back to the British days. As in the case of Muslims, giving Sikhs a separate identity, not religious but political, was a part of the divide and rule policy. But the trauma of the partition of Punjab did much to wash off that myth and the Sikhs returned to the Indian mainstream.
The Akalis often used the slogan of 'Sikh Panth in danger' (not unlike the Muslim League's equally false and disastrous slogan of Islam in danger!) to garner votes, but consistently failed in their attempts. Sikhs, by the dint of sheer hard work, prospered and came to occupy a dominant position in many fields, including in the armed forces. A distinction needs to be clearly made between a distinct religious identity and political separatism based on religion.
Why then did Punjab erupt in the 1980s?
Several explanations have been offered. Some attributed it to the deprivation of the masses in spite of the Green Revolution. Others felt that the Akali frustration at their inability to attain political power (as the SC/ST Sikhs and Hindus combined to support the Congress) was at the root of the violence. Machinations by Indira Gandhi, who was credited with having deliberately created Sikh militancy to gather frightened Hindu votes, has also been floated as a serious theory.
But none of these explanations suffices to understand the widespread support that militancy enjoyed at its peak. To understand this phenomenon, one has to go back to the decade of the 1960s and the Green Revolution.
In 1965, when the US effectively used food aid to browbeat India, Indira Gandhi and her dynamic minister in charge of food and agriculture, C Subramaniam, fashioned a strategy to attain food self-sufficiency in the shortest possible time frame. The irrigated lands of Punjab, Haryana, and Western Uttar Pradesh were targeted for application of miracle seeds, fertilizers and mechanisation.
The strategy succeeded and India became self-sufficient in foodgrain. But rising incomes and mechanisation brought in their wake social tensions.
In the hard work that intensive agricultural operations involved, the turban and the beard were seen as a hindrance. Sikhs in large numbers took to trimming or even shaving their beards and cutting their hair, both against the tenets of the Khalsa (pure) Panth. The hair and the beard are not mere external symbols for a Sikh, but a major part of his identity.
Worse, many took to smoking, a taboo in the Sikh ethos. A district like Amritsar, which has a majority Sikh population, became the highest revenue-earning district for cigarette companies. 'Paani piyo pump da te cigarette piyo Lamp da' was a catchy slogan that linked the smoking of Red Lamp cigarettes with water from the 'pump', subtly linked this symbol of the Green Revolution with smoking.
In travels through Punjab as an army officer, one was always welcome>d with open arms. It was also common to share the charpoy and lassi with the farmers. During all these encounters, one frequently heard a lament from Sikh elders that at the rate at which people were deserting the faith, in a few years there would be no Sikhs left in Punjab.
The relationship between Sikhs and Hindus was such that the moment a Sikh shaved his beard and cut his hair, he became a Hindu. Sikh society felt insecure at the assault of this 'modernisation' and feared for the survival of its identity. This feeling was not confined to the villages but was commonplace even among the Sikh intelligentsia.
In this situation of fear and foreboding arrived Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale with his single-point programme of strict adherence to the Sikh symbols. His campaign against trimming of hair and shaving of beards found a groundswell of support amongst the Sikh masses. And he enforced his dictates with ruthless force.
His violent methods brought him into direct confrontation with the State and soon militancy began in Punjab.
But 'modernisation', the real threat, is a formless entity. So the violence first targeted the Nirankaris, then the government machinery, and then the Hindus. In the final stages, the terrorists turned increasingly against the Sikhs themselves and became predatory. It is at this stage that the militants lost support and were finally overcome towards 1993.
The situation was tailormade for Pakistan. It intervened with a generous supply of arms and ammunition and mayhem began in right earnest. The US and the UK also saw in this an opportunity to destabilise India, their long-term goal during the Cold War. The West used expatriate Sikhs as an instrument of its policy and gave shelter and support to all manner of terrorist groups.
Indira Gandhi saw this as a direct challenge to India's very existence and eventually decided to act, leading to Operation Bluestar. The rest, as they say, is history.
There is an uncanny resemblance in this to the Islamist terrorism that the world is witnessing today. Like Sikhism then, Islam today is afraid of modernisation and Westernisation. This also explains the wide support terrorists enjoy in the Muslim world. Osama bin Laden is a spitting image of Bhindranwale.
Like Sikh terrorism, the current wave of Islamist terror will subside once the terrorists turn predatory (as their recent attacks in Saudi Arabia and Pakistan indicate) and lose popular support. Only then will the world be able to deal with this modern scourge. Punjab does offer a valuable lesson.
ah ki gand paya hai!
wat u wanna prove
 
This article stinks of bias.

Let me break it down for you.

"I had a packet of cigerettes on me. At the entrance itself I was told to deposit the packet in the locker and then go ahead."

What does this have to do with him trying to prove that bhindranwala was a terrorist?? Is he trying to say if we dont let him enter with a cigarette pack then we are extremists??..LOL


"It was quite common to see, at that time, that Hindu visitors to the Golden Temple far outnumbered Sikhs on a normal day. In my army days most of my close friends were Sikhs and therefore one was quite familiar with Sikh rituals and often visited gurdwaras as a matter of course on Sundays."

Is he trying to say hindus visit our shrine more than we do or he does not possess the common knowledge that the hindu population is 49 times greater than the sikh population and in india it is quite common for people to visit each others places. Does that make it a hindu place of worship? I think not.

"The violent movement that began initially as an anti-Nirankari agitation soon turned against the government and, later, Hindus."

Some one should let him know that if nirankaris had been arrested and put in jail right after the incident nothing of the sort that followed would have happened. Government was at fault which was predominantly hindu and was motivated by the idea of gathering votes by propogating religious divides. Sort of like what recently happened in Gujarat.. sensible logic perhaps??

"A distinction needs to be clearly made between a distinct religious identity and political separatism based on religion."

As hard as he is trying to distinct the two i should remind this guy that in case of Punjab two are interrelated. The idea of a separate state came after the fact that Sikhs failed to get any sort of recoginition from the Indian Government. Why did he not mention the peaceful agitations?? How were sikhs dealt with violently when they peacefully agitated before the olympics??

Someone should tell this guy people took to guns after peaceful attempts failed which this author fails to mention. You did not see guys holding up arms right after the incident. Why werent people who killed innocents put in jail for life? It was the Government refused to do anything thus adding fuel to fire.

Is asking for a seperate marriage act a terrorist demand? Even Pakistan has implemented it.

Is asking for control of state waters a terrorist demand? ...i dont think so.

Is asking for more economic decision making power a terrorist demand? NO ITS NOT



The fact of the matter is India fails to represent Sikhs at national or international level. Minorities are exploited at the expense of gathering votes from the majority. Recent example is Gujarat.

This Article is as crap as the writer who writes it. :thappar I will write a complete Rebutal as soon as i finish my university work. Infact i would love to show you how Indira Gandhi resembled Hitler.

What about the fact that thousands were killed with fake encounters in INdia?

Indian secret agencies made fake sikhs or bribed people to kill innocents?

What happened to Jaswant Singh Kalra who unmasked murders commmited by the police authorities?

What help did the Government give to the people who suffered in 1984?

Why did not the Government prevent the riots?

Why were the voters list used to kill people?

Why are the people that killed thousands are roaming free until today and a single person has not been punished? Infact they are running for Government again. wAY TO GO

These are the REAL questions that need to be answered rather than writing bullcrap articles like why bhindranwala resembles Osama?

I request the writer to next time use his/her brain before writing a short sighted article or better yet answer the above questions for me. :cool:

and if mods have to edit my post ...please leave me a message mentioning the "acceptable" reason. I will write a complete rebutal with supporting sources once i am done with uni work.. DHANWAAD.





 

onlycheema

Banned
Ah it's on rediff, need i say more.
Rediff is baised towards congress, just like vir sanghvi towards BJP.Few jounrlaists like sardesai( or wuteva) quit national TV when congress came to power.
 
Gand tan sarean ney hi paea...par ah jihney likhea article ik kan tey launi chahida a taka key.....

Hun jeh koi likhey how Indira Gandhi resembled Hitler....tan saari janta dey agg lag jani a.....
 

Bhullar_moge_wala

&#2606;&#2622;&#2608;&#2598;&#2622; &#2598;&#2606;
This article stinks of bias.

Let me break it down for you.

"I had a packet of cigerettes on me. At the entrance itself I was told to deposit the packet in the locker and then go ahead."

What does this have to do with him trying to prove that bhindranwala was a terrorist?? Is he trying to say if we dont let him enter with a cigarette pack then we are extremists??..LOL


"It was quite common to see, at that time, that Hindu visitors to the Golden Temple far outnumbered Sikhs on a normal day. In my army days most of my close friends were Sikhs and therefore one was quite familiar with Sikh rituals and often visited gurdwaras as a matter of course on Sundays."

Is he trying to say hindus visit our shrine more than we do or he does not possess the common knowledge that the hindu population is 49 times greater than the sikh population and in india it is quite common for people to visit each others places. Does that make it a hindu place of worship? I think not.

"The violent movement that began initially as an anti-Nirankari agitation soon turned against the government and, later, Hindus."

Some one should let him know that if nirankaris had been arrested and put in jail right after the incident nothing of the sort that followed would have happened. Government was at fault which was predominantly hindu and was motivated by the idea of gathering votes by propogating religious divides. Sort of like what recently happened in Gujarat.. sensible logic perhaps??

"A distinction needs to be clearly made between a distinct religious identity and political separatism based on religion."

As hard as he is trying to distinct the two i should remind this guy that in case of Punjab two are interrelated. The idea of a separate state came after the fact that Sikhs failed to get any sort of recoginition from the Indian Government. Why did he not mention the peaceful agitations?? How were sikhs dealt with violently when they peacefully agitated before the olympics??

Someone should tell this guy people took to guns after peaceful attempts failed which this author fails to mention. You did not see guys holding up arms right after the incident. Why werent people who killed innocents put in jail for life? It was the Government refused to do anything thus adding fuel to fire.

Is asking for a seperate marriage act a terrorist demand? Even Pakistan has implemented it.

Is asking for control of state waters a terrorist demand? ...i dont think so.

Is asking for more economic decision making power a terrorist demand? NO ITS NOT



The fact of the matter is India fails to represent Sikhs at national or international level. Minorities are exploited at the expense of gathering votes from the majority. Recent example is Gujarat.

This Article is as crap as the writer who writes it. :thappar I will write a complete Rebutal as soon as i finish my university work. Infact i would love to show you how Indira Gandhi resembled Hitler.

What about the fact that thousands were killed with fake encounters in INdia?

Indian secret agencies made fake sikhs or bribed people to kill innocents?

What happened to Jaswant Singh Kalra who unmasked murders commmited by the police authorities?

What help did the Government give to the people who suffered in 1984?

Why did not the Government prevent the riots?

Why were the voters list used to kill people?

Why are the people that killed thousands are roaming free until today and a single person has not been punished? Infact they are running for Government again. wAY TO GO

These are the REAL questions that need to be answered rather than writing bullcrap articles like why bhindranwala resembles Osama?

I request the writer to next time use his/her brain before writing a short sighted article or better yet answer the above questions for me. :cool:

and if mods have to edit my post ...please leave me a message mentioning the "acceptable" reason. I will write a complete rebutal with supporting sources once i am done with uni work.. DHANWAAD.
100% agree veer g, lok sach likde v nahi te sach listen v nahi karde
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top