A Critical Review of Sachi Sakhi and Parasaraprasna Sometime back a fellow stung by the venom of “caste pride” insisted that Waras Shah complimented the fiercely independent nature of Jats by saying: Waras, the Jats have become masters of the country and there is a government in every home. “Dear brother,” I replied, “Contrary to what you are saying, Waras Shah’s observation is about the quarrelsome and self-destructive nature of Jats (a predominant farming community of Punjab). His comments are about the Sikh movement dominated by Jats, which had split into several groups due to internal fighting. These groups were out to destroy each other forsaking Sikh ethos and forgetting their commitment to Guru Granth and Guru Panth.” Besides, Waras Shah has also remarked that no one can distort things the way a Jat does. Jats can distort the meaning of a hill-stream into a mouse, which makes it impossible for the authorities (to get the truth out of Jats). However, Gurtej Singh’s tribute to Sirdar Kapur Singh in the Sikh Virsa of March 2003 is clearly an example of exaggeration.Gurtej called Kapur Singh a great thinker (philosopher) of the twentieth century – an eminent scholar – and Bhai Gurdas of our times. There is no doubt that Kapur Singh was an intelligent man. He had the credentials to show it. He was an ICS officer with M. A. in philosophy from Cambridge, and he was well-read man with knowledge of several languages. However, his works, Sachi Sakhi and Parasaraprasna[5] don’t reflect either deep understanding of Sikhism or logical thinking. To my knowledge these books have not been analyzed on the touchstone of evidence, logic, and Aad Guru Granth Sahib (AGGS). This article attempts to examine them in light of these criteria. Sachi Sakhi (True Story) Kapur Singh published the first edition, but I don’t have information about the second edition. However, Shromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee(S.G.P.C) published the third edition in 1993 when the book was not available in the market and the Dharam Parchar Committee distributes it. Through his books Sirdar Kapur Singh, National Professor of Sikhism, has misled Sikhs. It is unfortunate when intelligent people, who haven’t even seen this book, quote it forcefully. The book is mostly about Sikh politics, Kapur Singh’s unlawful dismissal as an ICS officer, and the unjust treatment meted out to him by the Indian judicial system, which is supposed to protect the rights of all citizens. However, it also contains innuendoes, allegations, questionable statements, unsubstantiated claims, and misinterpretations of various events. Analysis of all the items is beyond the scope of this article. Some of the items, which have become common topics of debate or conversation within the Sikh community are scrutinised hereunder. Myth no. 1 On pages 101-13: Kapur Singh claims that the British offered Sikhs their own “Sikh State” and Mohammad Ali Jinnah offered them “an autonomous Sikh State within Pakistan”. However, the ignorant, naïve, and inept Sikh leaders like Master Tara Singh, Giani Kartar Singh, Baldev Singh and Maharaja Yadvinder Singh did not respond positively to explore these offers. Thus, they are responsible for rendering future generations of Sikhs subservient to Hindus. His claim is based on the information he got from newspapers, press releases, and his own conversations with Jinnah, Maharaja Bhupinder Singh of Patiala, Sir Jogindera Singh, Sardar Shivdev Singh Oberai and others. At no time he was personally involved in the negotiations between the Akalis and Jinnah or the British. It is difficult to imagine that the British or Jinnah’s offer to Sikhs was simply altruistic. Furthermore, it is difficult to imagine that few Sikhs like Master Tara Singh, Giani Kartar Singh, Baldev Singh and Maharaja Yadvinder Singh could have prevented Jinnah or the British from pursuing their objectives. They could have talked to other Sikh leaders or taken their offers directly to the Sikh masses to accomplish their goals. However, there is no evidence that they talked to any other Sikh leader about their offer. Most documents relating to the partition of India have been released and published, and there is no evidence, that either the British or Jinnah offered the Sikhs “a Sikh State,” or “an autonomous Sikhs State within Pakistan”, respectively. It turns out that the British as well as Jinah were trying to persuade the Sikhs to join Pakistan in order to avoid the division of the Sikh community into two halves, one in Pakistan and the other in India. The Sikh leadership declined this suggestion wisely because Sikhs remember very vividly the atrocities of the Mughal rule against the community. Instead, they threw their lot with the Hindus, as they had no prior experience living under Hindu rule. Had they accepted the offer of Jinnah the situation of the Sikhs in Pakistan would have been far worse than that of the Ahmadiyya Muslims. Dr. Abdus Salam, an eminent scientist of the twentieth century and a Nobel Laureate in physics, was stripped of his Pakistani citizenship. Many Sikhs fault the Sikh leadership for their naivete for relying on public statements made by Gandhi and Nehru that Sikhs would enjoy autonomy in an independent India. They argue that the Sikh leadership should have obtained written guaranty signed by the Hindu leadership. But would the Hindus have honored that guaranty after becoming “Masters” of India! India agreed to a UN supervised plebiscite in Jammu and Kashmir to solve the Kashmir problem. Even the United Nations and the world opinion has not been able to force India to fulfil its agreement for more than fifty years. The same thing would have happened to any written guaranty given to the Sikhs by the Hindu leadership. There is no doubt that Sikh leadership was taken in by the liberal and secular façade put up by Gandhi and Nehru, who were diehard believers of the Hindu caste system and the perverse morality preached by Lord Krishna in the Mahabharta which simply put states: victory is every thing; cheating, lying, and manipulation is the essence of Dharma. But we can remind the ungrateful Hindu community and inform the world that had Sikhs accepted the offer of Jinnah, Pakistan’s border would have been close to Dehli and Jammu and Kashmir would also have gone to Pakistan? When the partition of India seemed inevitable, it was the Akali leadership who insisted that if the country was going to be divided on communal lines then why should East Punjab and West Bengal, where Muslims were in minority, be given to Pakistan. This idea was put forward by the Akalis, whom Kapur Singh calls stupid. The Congress leadership did not care if all of Punjab were to be included in Pakistan. They were eager to get rid off most of the Muslims so that they could establish their own Ram Raj (rule of Hindu god Rama). It is true that Giani Kartar Singh and Master Tara Singh did not match the education of Gandhi, Nehru and Jinnah, who were lawyers, educated in top British universities. However, both kartar Singh and Tara Singh were honest and self-sacrificing leaders, who worked very hard to safeguard Sikh interest and saved the community from annihilation. The Akali leaders also put forth the idea of total transfer of Muslim and Hindu-Sikh populations in Punjab. In pre-partition Punjab, the Sikhs constituted 13% of the population and were scattered all over Punjab with heavy concentration in central districts, with a slight majority only in one Tehsil, Taran Taran. After partition, the Sikhs were in majority in the Punjabi-speaking region of the Indian Punjab, which later on became Punjabi Suba (state). On page 115, Kapur Singh writes, “After an inquiry it was found that the British wanted to propose to the Sikhs that if they can’t come to any reasonable agreement with Muslims, then the Sikhs should accept ‘a Sikh State’ covering an area from Panipat to Nankana Sahib. This state could have an access to the ocean. This state could enter into a defense pact with England according to which 25,000 British armed forces would be stationed in the Sikh State for ten years. Seasoned British army officers would train the Sikh army. The Sikhs would buy military equipment from the British on the condition that 50,000 Sikhs would be employed in the British army for ten years. The treaty between the British and the Sikhs could be reviewed after ten years.” However, Kapur Singh does not mention the composition of the population of the proposed “Sikh State”. In 1947 there was no district in Punjab with Sikh majority whereas the partition of the country was based on the “population majority concept”. For example, the seven districts – Hoshiarpur, Jullandur, Ludhiana, Ferozepur, Lahore, Amritsar and Gurdaspur, according to 1941 census, had 28 % Sikhs, 46 % Muslims and 26 % Hindus and others. According to the 1931 census, the population of the area from Panipat to Nanakana Sahib was 42% Muslim[7]. If these were any guide, the Muslim population would have gained further in percentage by 1947. The 58% non-Muslim population was divided between Hindus, Sikhs, Christians, and others. The Sikh population of this area was not more than 25%. Would Muslims and Hindus of this proposed “Sikh State” or Pakistan and India have allowed this state to become a Sikh state? Israel is a Jewish State because its population is more than 80% Jewish; Pakistan is an Islamic State because its population is more than 95% Muslim and India is a Hindu State because its population is about 80% Hindu. It is no wonder that there is no evidence that the British or Jinnah offered the Sikhs a Sikh State or an autonomous Sikh State within Pakistan, respectively. Written by BALDEV SINGH
Posted on: Mon, 10 Jun 2013 02:12:48 +0000
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015