|
|
|
|
|
||
Chapter 4
False Statements about Sikh Gurus
It is evident from chapter 3 that Jakobsh’s knowledge of Sikh
theology is barely minimal. Intentionally or otherwise Jakobsh has
misinterpreted/distorted the hymns to suit her thesis thus revealing her ignorance of both the Indian and Sikh history. After exhausting
the hymns from AGGS to denigrate Guru Nanak, she attacks him directly for being
uncaring about women without providing any evidence or reason:
While aware of the social
challenges facing the widows of his days, Nanak instead censured them for their
unrestrained desires. He did not re-evaluate social institutions such as
marriage and marriage practices to make them more equitable for women.
Moreover, his silence regarding sati is rather surprising, given that it was
primarily confined to the upper echelons of society, to which he belonged.
There was also no critique of female infanticide, again a practice aligned to
upper castes. In the final analysis, when it came to social status of woman,
Nanak seemed content to leave the prevailing system in place.1
His was a message of
interior religion, a vision of love and devotion to the Ultimate, who in grace
and promise of emancipation made no distinction between men and women, or
between castes.2
Only a person who has not studied Guru Nanak’s teachings or someone
whose agenda is to malign him would make such outrageous statements. These
statements echo what McLeod has said about Sikh Gurus and to which she has added some
of her own words. Like McLeod and Oberoi, Jakobsh fails to mention the political and
religious conditions prevalent in the Indian subcontinent when Nanak launched
the movement. At the advent of Guru Nanak (1469-1539 C.E.), most of North
Indian subcontinent had been under oppressive Muslim rule for at least five
centuries. Nanak was born in a small village near Lahore, a town situated
between two Muslim capitals, Delhi and Kabul. The bigotry and oppression of
Muslim rulers had reduced the Hindu population to the level of slaves. They
were deprived of all human dignity as revealed by Muslim and Hindu writers:
Al-Biruni (973-1048/1049), the renowned Indologist came to
India in the wake of the invading forces led by Mahmud of Ghazni. He writes:
No Muslim conqueror passed beyond
the frontier of Kabul and the river Sindh until the days of the Turks, when
they seized power in Ghazna under the Samani dynasty and the supreme power fell
to the lot of Nasiraddaula Sabuktagin. This prince chose the holy war as his calling,
and therefore, called himself Al-ghazi (i.e. warring on the road of Allah). In the interest of his
successors he constructed, in order to weaken the Indian frontier, those roads
on which afterwards his son Yaminaddaula
Mahmud marched into India during a period of thirty years and more. God be
merciful to both father and son! Mahmud utterly ruined the prosperity of the
country, and performed there wonderful exploits, by which the Hindus became
like atoms of dust scattered in all directions, and like a tale of old in the
mouth of the people. Their scattered remains cherish, of course, the most
inveterate aversion towards all Muslims.3
Quoting various historical sources, Daulat Rai, a Hindu Arya
Samajist has described in “Sahib–i-Kamal” Guru Gobind Singh (Par Excellent Master, Guru Gobind Singh) the conditions of Hindus under
Muslim rule as horrible, degrading, dehumanizing and pathetic. Not only did
Muslim invaders kill Hindus by the thousands, looted their properties and
carried away men and women as slaves in the thousands, but also under some
Muslim rulers Hindus were not allowed even the comforts of good life like
good clothes, good food, riding horses, wearing a turban or keeping good homes and
valuables or even beautiful children or wives. They were allowed to have
minimum possessions for mere survival and often they were given two alternatives:
conversion to Islam or to pay Jazia (tax on non-Muslims).4
Another prominent Arya Samajist, Gokul Chand Narang concurs
with Daulat Rai when he says:
But the on rush of Islam spread
such confusion and consternation among the Hindu ranks that all chances of
reconsideration and reform came to an end. The instinct of self-preservation,
in any form and at any sacrifice, became supreme and all-absorbing. The storm
threatened to sweep every thing before it, and the Hindus, evidently, thought
it more politic to preserve chaff as well as wheat than try to winnow and loose
both. The priests, the hereditary guardians of Hinduism, lazy and lifeless like
all hereditary incumbents of high position, could not unite all Hindus together
so as by one united action to hurl back the waves of invasion.5
Ishwaro va Dillishwaro va “the Lord
of Delhi is as great as God” had long been a maxim with the terrified Hindus.6
Nanak had, no doubt greatly
succeeded in reviving the dying Hindu society, which was fairly on the way to
convalescence, but environments were still unfavorable, the orthodox priesthood
being still so strong, that he feared a relapse, unless some one was appointed
to look after the patient. Had Nanak died without a successor there would have
been no Sikhism today or at best simply another Kabirism.7
In view of this it is difficult to imagine what “upper echelon” of “Hindu society”
Jakobsh is talking about? There were no Hindu rulers or aristocrats on the
horizon where Guru Nanak lived. Only those Hindus had some privileges who
worked for or collaborated with the Muslim rulers. And they could be regarded
as “upper echelon of society”. Guru Nanak rebuked such Hindus, as discussed
earlier in Chapter 3.
Bedi sub-caste into which Nanak was born, was not ranked
high among Khatris and Nanak renounced his caste the day he refused to wear Janeo (sacred thread), which was
mandatory for Khatri men. Besides, his father was a small shopkeeper. Before
Guru Nanak there is no evidence that any Hindu ever protested against the
oppression of Muslim rulers let loose on the Hindu population or the injustice
and inhumanity of the caste system including the exploitation of the masses by the
Hindu and Muslim clergy and the prevailing ill treatment of women. On the other
hand, writes Grewal: “A rigorous analysis of the compositions of Guru Nanak
reveals that there is hardly anything in contemporary politics, society or
religion that he finds commendable.”8 I
wonder how Jakobsh has missed this observation as she has cited Grewal eight
times and listed his writings including the one, which contains the above
citation, thirteen times in references and selected bibliography. Contrary to
Jakobsh’s assertion, Nanak happened to be the first Indian to compose a song extolling
the virtues of a woman.
Guru Nanak describes very vividly the effect
of the caste system and the Muslim rule on Indian society and particularly on
women:
Women have lost their vitality and become submissive and men have become brutal. Politeness, soberness (self-control) and sincerity have banished and dishonest living has become the way of life. The sense of shame and honor has disappeared from the society. Nanak, only the One is True, do not look for another one.
AGGS, M 1, p. 1243.
Contrary to what was happening in the Indian society,
Guru Nanak emphasized that Earth was created to practice righteousness and the
goal of human life is to become sachiara/gurmukh (God-centered being):
This world is the abode of the True One, Who resides in it.
AGGS,
M 1, p. 463.
It is for the gurmukh that the True One has fashioned the Earth.
AGGS,
M 1, p. 941.
AGGS,
M 1, p. 1033.
In the beginning of Japji, on the opening page of AGGS, Guru Nanak describes God as Sach, meaning Everlasting or Truth. Then in the first stanza of Japji, on the same page, he has enunciates the purpose of human life:
“How
could one become a sachiara (Godlike
or gurmukh) and how could one get rid
of ignorance and falsehood?” “By living in harmony with Hukam (Cosmic Law),” says Nanak.
AGGS, Jap 1, p. 1.
How could one get rid of ignorance and
falsehood? On the pages of AGGS it is mentioned several times that Sabad (Word, Truth) destroys ignorance,
falsehood, superstition and doubt. When the yogis asked Guru Nanak, “Who is
your Guru or whose disciple are you of?”
Sabad (Word, Divine knowledge) is the Guru and my mind, which is
focused on the Word and comprehends it, is the disciple,” replied Guru Nanak.
AGGS, M 1, pp. 942-943.
How can one understand Hukam? It is through true knowledge. So a sachiara (gurmukh) is the one who understands Hukam and conducts himself/herself accordingly. Man-made social distinctions are worthless, as it is God, Who judges the real worth of a person. The Guru emphasizes that the real low-castes are those who turn their back on God:
Nanak, whether one is inferior or superior is found out when one goes to the court of God (God-Consciousness).
AGGS, Jap 34, p. 7.
Nanak, without imbibing God one
becomes low; the real low-castes are the ones who turn their back on God.
AGGS, M 1, p. 10.
Caste-pride is like tasting poison that causes death. Caste is of no consequence in the judgment of the content of character/truthfulness.
AGGS, M 1, p. 142.
Caste or worldly power is of no avail in the court of God, as there the rules are different; only those are honored who have earned spiritual merit by living truthful lives.
AGGS, M 1, p. 469.
Respected one, we are neither of high or low or medium caste; we belong to God Who is our refuge.
AGGS, M 1, p. 504.
Those who believe in the fatherhood of God are not outcastes/untouchables/low-caste and they are not afraid of anyone else.
AGGS, M 1, p. 796.
There
are thousands and thousands (innumerable) of Khatris, Brahmans, Sudras and
Vaisyas. If anyone of them becomes a gurmukh
(enlightened being) then such a one would find salvation.
AGGS, M 1, p. 878.
Truth is higher than every thing but higher still is truthful living. Regard everyone high; do not look at anyone as low because the One, Whose light shines in all, creates all.
AGGS, M 1, p. 62.
One gets what one does. What one sows, so shall one reap.
AGGS, M 1, p. 662.
We earn what we do day and night. Why blame others, it is our own doings that lead us astray.
AGGS, M 5, p. 745.
Nanak, vices/faults are like chains around our necks and they can be cut only with virtues, which are our only loved ones.
AGGS, M 1, p. 595.
Good and bad deeds determine the relationship with God. According to their deeds some are drawn closer to God, whereas others move away.
AGGS, Jap, Slok, p. 8.
There are two types of human activities, the ones that bring about union with God and others that cause separation from God.
AGGS, M 29, p. 6.
The one who realizes union with God is called jiwan mukta, the
liberated one (gurmukh), the
other who is separated from God is called a reprobate (manmukh), the
self-centered being.
One must ask Jakobsh: Where is the evidence
that Guru Nanak showed no concern for widows, institution of marriage, sati and
female infanticide? Jakobsh appears to emulate McLeod who is known to have said, “As a historian I will ask questions; it
is for the Sikhs to answer.” On the contrary, there is overwhelming evidence
that right from the start, Guru Nanak made it abundantly clear
that he stood by the lowest of the low of Indian society. In the social milieu of that time it was the woman who occupied the lowest rung of
caste hierarchy in each caste and the sub-castes. Nanak never shirked from
denouncing injustice and cruelty and, preached love, compassion and reverence
for life:
Nanak will stand by the lowest of lowest, not with the elite. Societies that take care of the downtrodden have the blessing of God.
AGGS, M 1, p. 15.
Guru Nanak’s theology is rooted in compassion without which one cannot find the righteous path. Without compassion one is spiritually deaf, blind and mute. Using the mythical bull as a metaphor for the gravitational force, which keeps the cosmos in equilibrium, Guru Nanak says the mythical bull is “righteousness” born out of compassion (daya). In other words, all human ethics are rooted in compassion:
Mythical bull is righteousness, which is born out of compassion and it is righteousness that keeps peace and harmony in the world.
AGGS, Jap 16, p. 3.
Nanak, a body that is devoid of love and longing is lifeless.
AGGS, M 2, p. 89.
Truthful is the one who follows the truth and shows compassion for all living beings and practices charity.
AGGS, M 1, p. 468.
Guru Nanak condemned Babur for the atrocities
and the rape of women perpetrated by his army and he denounced the Lodhis for
not protecting them. The Guru emphatically denounced cruelty:
It is a murderous age, the kings are butchers and righteousness has taken on wings. It is the dark night of falsehood and the moon of truth does not rise anywhere.
AGGS, M 1, p. 145.
Countless are fools, ignorant to the utmost. Countless are thieves, who devour others’ possessions. Countless are the tyrants who impose their will on others by brute force. Countless are cutthroats who commit murders. Countless are sinners who go on committing crimes. Countless are liars who keep repeating lies.
AGGS, Jap 18, p. 4.
If bloodstain makes the clothes unclean then how could the conscience of those who drink human blood (exploit and murder human beings) be clean?
AGGS, M 1, p. 140.
Commenting on Nanak’s theology Jakobsh
asserts: “His was a message of interior religion,” a line taken from McLeod.
Like McLeod, she doesn’t say what does “interior religion” mean? Does Jakobsh not know that Guru Nanak
rejected the Hindu and Semitic ideas of hell,
heaven and salvation. For Guru Nanak salvation meant moral life, freedom from
ignorance, freedom from religious, political and, economic tyranny (spiritual
and temporal sovereignty), and providing altruistic service to society. Guru
Nanak’s God is not located in a far away place called "heaven,” rather at
the center of family life as a father, mother, lover, husband, sibling,
relative and friend. Taking notice of the dismal condition of the masses, Guru
Nanak pointed out three major problems:
One pain is the separation from God, second pain is grinding poverty and third pain is the tyranny of the ruler. (It should be noted that vast majority of the human population is still facing these three problems!)
AGGS, M 1, p. 1256.
It is service to humanity that earns seat in God’s court.
AGGS, M 1, p. 26.
Nanak says, “When the Guru (God) opened my mind to the Reality, my false perceptions were removed and I was liberated from ignorance.
AGGS, M 5, p. 188.
It may come as a rude surprise to Jakobsh that
Nanak launched a campaign to awaken the masses to fight tyranny of both the rulers
and the dehumanizing caste system:
Even if I were to live under blood-sucking rulers, I will love and glorify God and would never get tired of doing so. In other words I would never deviate from the righteous path.
AGGS, M 1, p. 142.
The Guru gave a clarion call to people
with an explicit caution that to follow him would require sacrifice:
If you want to play the game of love (follow the righteous path) then follow me and be prepared to make supreme sacrifice. Once you step on this path, do not hesitate to offer your head.
AGGS, M 1, p. 1412.
This proclamation is central to the Sikh movement¾the basis
of Miri-Piri (temporal
and spiritual
sovereignty) and the evolution of the noble Khalsa Order. Only a moral person (gurmukh) can be a
mir-pir/Khalsa.
Does Jakobsh know that once inspired by Nanakian philosophy, the Khalsa forces
forged mostly from the downtrodden masses of the Hindu Society--Sudras and
Untouchables--fought against three formidable foes the mighty Mughals, the
proponents of the Caste System and, foreign invaders? Refering to the Khalsa kingdom Baron Hugel,
an Austrian traveler, wrote:
“The state established by Ranjit
Singh was ‘the most wonderful object in the whole world.’”9
Despite everything the Gurus did and said in favor of women, Jakobsh
remains unconvinced and questions their sincerity:
Female infanticide was also
condemned by the Gurus. Yet this may very well have stemmed directly from the
highly esteemed guru lineage. According to Punjabi lore, Dharam Chand, a
grandson of Guru Nanak, was humiliated at his daughter’s marriage by the
groom’s family. Chand was so incensed that he ordered all Bedis to henceforth
kill their daughters as soon as they were born rather than bear such
humiliation. Dharam Chand, the story continues took on the burden of the crime
of female infanticide from that day on, he moved as though bearing a heavy
weight upon his shoulders. According to Ashu Malhotra (2002: 55-56), the latter
part of the story may as well be interpreted as showing the permanent
humiliation of daughters being born in the Bedi family (Browne 1857: 115-16).
Guru Amar Das’s condemnation of the practice may well have stemmed from a need
to distance the Sikh panth under his leadership from the original guru lineage
that was at the forefront of the practice of female infanticide.10
This is the first time I came to know of the so-called “Punjabi
lore” as in the above narrative. What do you make of Jakobsh? She
likes this absurd story to the point she mentioned it twice. Why is Jakobsh so
desperate to discredit Guru Amar Das? Let us examine her arguments; the
narrative is cumbersome historically but crucial to determine Jakobsh’s fallacy.
1. Sikhs did not hold Guru Nanak’s descendents in “high esteem” either
during Guru Amar Das’s time or before or even later
because they worked against the Sikh movement. According to AGGS, Guru Nanak
did not find his sons to be worthy to carry his message and the movement forward,
so he nominated one of his devotees, Bhai Lehna (Guru Angad) to succeed him:
If the Guru gives
an order, why not accept it as truth and carry it out? But the sons refused to
follow his order and turned their back on him. They were dishonest, disobedient
and self-conceited. The one (Bhai Lehna) who obeyed the order and carried it
out was placed on the throne. Who won and who lost?
AGGS, Balvand and
Satta, p. 967.
Guru Nanak
censured them (his sons) and, Guru Angad regarded these arrogant ones as liars. The
third Guru felt pity for these wretched fellows. It was the fourth Guru who
forgave all the slanderers and wicked.
AGGS, M 4, p. 308.
Bhai Gurdas, who was Guru Amar Das’s nephew and contemporary of five
Gurus from second to sixth, was an erudite, a distinguished poet and a great
Sikh theologian. Guru Arjan chose him as the scribe for Adi Granth. In his
composition, Bhai Gurdas has listed the names of prominent Sikhs from Guru
Nanak to Guru Hargobind (sixth Guru). Surprisingly, there is no Bedi in that
list. Furthermore, he also says that Guru Nanak’s sons refused to follow his
path. His elder son Sri Chand tried to hijack Guru Nanak’s movement in the
opposite direction by starting his own ascetic order. His other son Lakhmi
Chand and his grandson Dharam Chand were vain persons:
The sons did not accept Guru
Nanak’s message, as they were disobedient, self-conceited and misguided.
Bhai Gurdas, Varan Bahi Gurdas, 1, p. 16.
Sri Chand (elder son)
adopted celibate and ascetic life as a young man. After Guru Nanak’s death, he
built a dehura (shrine, temple) in
the name of Guru Nanak to set up his own Udasi (ascetic) sect. Guru Nanak’s
grandson, Dharam Chand son of Lakhmi Chand, turned out to be vainglorious.
Varan Bahi
Gurdas, 26, p. 214.
Jakobsh acknowledges
(pp. 85, 175, 183, 213-14) that Baba Khem Singh Bedi was a British toady, who
opposed the Singh Sabha movement led by the Tat Khalsa, liberation of Gurdwaras
from the control mahants, and the Anand Marriage Act. Bedi along with his sons
and supporters used to proclaim that Sikhs are Hindus.11 He wanted
to be accepted as a Guru12 with the help of the British, since they controlled
the Gurdwaras and had handed them to Hindu mahants and pujaris (priests).
Khem Singh Bedi’s son, Kartar Singh Bedi supported Mahant Narain Das who
murdered more than 150 Sikhs in cold blood at Nankana Sahib in 1921. Sikhs
remember Kartar Singh Bedi as Kartaru
Bedin (Kartaru the apostate).13 Further,
the population of Bedis is unknown; so it is difficult to say how many of them
are Sikhs or Hindus? Most Bedis
I have met are Hindus.
2. It defies reason and common sense that all Bedis promptly obeyed Dharam
Chand’s order and started killing their newly born daughters.
It is not out of place to state that even Guru Nanak’s own sons did not follow
him, not to speak of other members of the Bedi community. Besides, if all the
Bedis followed Dharam Chand’s order then who in their right mind would have
given their daughters for marriage to such monsters? People who killed their daughters
were ostracised as kurimar or
“daughter slayers”14 or worse a kanjar,
(a man of the class whose women are prostitutes, man of no respect).
3. British imperialist
used sati, female infanticide and other reprehensible customs and practices of
the Indian people to claim moral superiority over them; hence their
justification for ruling over them to “civilize the uncivilized.”15 Being Euro-centric, Jakobsh does not see any
problem with this chimerical story recorded in 1857 in Indian Infanticide: Its origin, Progress and Suppression by a
British official, John C. Browne. Female infanticide was practised in India,
but not to the extent Jakobsh expects us readers to believe! If female
infanticide had been that widespread as she claims, India’s population figures
would have presented the facts.
After condemning Guru Amar
Das, Jakobsh goes after Guru Gobind Singh:
Guru Gobind
Singh’s harsh prohibition of killing of female babies pointed to a practice
which had mostly gone on largely unchecked since the guruship of Amar Das, the
first Sikh guru known to have proscribed female infanticide (Grewal 1990: 51).
The practice had evidently not ended with Guru Amar Das’ injunction. In fact,
according to Ashu Malhotra (2000: 56) it became a central feature of both Bedi
and Sondhi guru lineages. Female infanticide became the means by which these
lineages rose above traditional caste biases among the Khatris.16
Here again she goes off a
wild goose chase! Guru Gobind Singh being a descendent of Guru Ram Das was born
in a Sodhi family, not Sondhi, a name of another community among the Punjabi
Khatris. Moreover, Guru Gobind Singh’s blood lineage had unfriendly relations
with the Sikhs as they tried to hijack the Sikh movement and aligned themselves
with the enemies of the Sikhs. Guru Gobind Singh issued instructions to the
Khalsa not to have any social connections with his Sodhi relatives: Minas, the
descendants of Guru Ram Das’s elder son Prithi Chand; descendants of Dhir Mal,
grandson of Guru Hargobind; and Ram Rai, elder son of Guru Har Rai.17
Besides, there are many Sodhis who are Hindus. Moreover, the Gurus rejected and
denounced caste and lineage. For them lineage was not through blood, rather it
was a spiritual lineage from Guru Nanak to Guru Gobind Singh to Sikhs who
follow the Nanakian philosophy faithfully.
Further, it is preposterous
on Jakobsh’s part to claim without evidence that the Bedis or Sodhis used
female infanticide as means for upward mobility within the “Khatri caste
hierarchy.” This implies that other Khatri groups, who were higher in caste
status than Bedis and Sodhis must have been practicing female infanticide on a
much larger scale than Bedis or Sodhis! Had Jakobsh entertained the idea that people
who practiced female infanticide were not held high, she would have taken a
step towards the truth and found that people practicing female
infanticide were ostracized instead. They were stigmatized as kurimars14 or
worse as kanjars. I remember a family in
a village whose ancestors had killed a baby girl five generations back, and they were
still taunted as kurimar (girl
killers), khuni (murderer) and hatiare (murdrer).
Additionally,
female infanticide was not confined to any particular caste or sub-caste within
a caste; some families without regard to religion or caste carried it out and
the numbers of such incidences were rather small. For example, let us examine
female to male ratio in the 1910 census of Punjab undertaken by the British. It
was 780 women for 1000 men, when Sikhs were about 10% of the population of
Punjab, the majority being Muslims (50%), the rest were Hindus (35%) and
others (5%).18 Therefore this huge gap of 220, between males and
females, could not possibly be due to female infanticide in Hindus and Sikhs
alone. Muslims too were responsible for it. The effect of female infanticide on
the female to male population ratio was rather small in comparison to two other
major causes: discrimination against female child in general and ill health of
the married women. Due to inherent discrimination against female in patriarchal culture milieu, there was relatively higher mortality rate of young girls than boys due to malnutrition in poor families. Death of young women
during childbirth and heavy toll on women’s health due to many rapid
pregnancies was the other factor. Recent widely publicized startling studies on
female feticide in India through sex selection have revealed that this evil
practice is prevalent more among the economically well off and educated than
among poor and less educated Indians without regard to religion or caste.
Finally, in her desperation to malign the Gurus,
Jakobsh fails to even think straight. For example, in the next chapter she says that the
British classified Khatris as Vaisyas. If that is true then whom were the
Bedis and Sodhis trying to impress by practicing female infanticide in their desire to
move up the caste ladder?
The Khatris of
Punjab, originally classified as Vaisyas in the Census of 1901, held great
protest meetings, and claimed instead to be direct descendents of the
Kshatriyas of ancient Hindu mythology, the great warrior-caste lineage. Census
superintendents were accordingly instructed to include Khatri under Kshatriya
warrior caste in their classification project.19
After accusing the Guru of
being insensitive to women’s issues, Jakobsh
accuses the Gurus of following the caste system in their marriages:
“Moreover, while
insisting that caste was no bar to enlightenment, Guru Nanak and the gurus who
followed married within Khatri caste regulations.”20
This is a false statement, and an echo of what McLeod has been
saying since the 1960s. Guru Nanak rejected janeu
(sacred thread) that was mandatory for a Khatri to wear. He dined in the homes
of Sudras, Untouchables and Muslims. His closest friend was a Muslim minstrel.
He went to mosques and Muslim countries. I
would like Jakobsh or McLeod to cite a single example of a Khatri who was
considered a Khatri Hindu after doing what Guru Nanak did? Besides, Guru
Nanak rejected all the essentials of Hinduism and denounced the Khatri
community for its cowardice and hypocrisy:
The Khatris have abdicated their
duties. Instead they have adopted the language and manners of their masters
(Muslims)) whom they regard as malesh (unclean, polluted). The whole society has degenerated
abdicating moral obligations.
AGGS, M 1, p. 663.
Guru Nanak’s parents
arranged his marriage, but according to Sikh tradition he refused to be married
by a Brahman according to Vedic ceremony. The next two Gurus, Angad and Amar
Das became Sikhs when they were already married and had grown up children. The
fourth Guru Ram Das, who was also born to Hindu parents, married a Sikh woman,
Guru Amar Das’s daughter. All the successors after Guru Ram Das were his descendants
and all of them except Guru Har Krishan, who died young, were married to Sikh
women. So it is preposterous for Jakobsh to assert that Guru Nanak and the
Gurus who followed him married within the Khatri caste regulations.
References
1. Doris R. Jakobsh. Relocating
Gender In Sikh History: Transformation,
Meaning and Identity. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press, 2003, p. 26.
2. Ibid., p. 29.
3. Qeyamuddin Ahmad (Ed.). India by Al-Biruni. National Book Trust, India, third reprint, 1995, p. 10.
4. Daulat Rai. “Sahib-i-Kamal”
Guru Gobind Singh (Hindi). Amritsar:
Gurmat Sahit Charitable Trust, 7th reprint, 1993 pp. 25-64.
5. Gokul C. Narang. Transformation of Sikhism. New Delhi: New Book Society of India, 5th edition, 1960, p. 19.
6. Ibid., p. 98.
7. Ibid., p. 27.
8. J. S. Grewal. The Sikhs Of The Punjab. New Delhi: Cambridge University Press, 1994, p. 28.
9. Ibid., p. 113.
10. Doris R. Jakobsh. Relocating
Gender In Sikh History: Transformation,
Meaning and Identity. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press, 2003, p. 26.
11. J. S.
Grewal. The Sikhs Of The Punjab. New
Delhi: Cambridge University Press, 1994, p. 146.
12. Sangat
Singh. The Sikhs In History. New
Delhi: Uncommon Books, 4th edition, 2001 p. 146.
13. Ruchi R.
Sahni. Struggle For Reform In Sikh Shrines.
(Ganda Singh Ed.) Amritsar: Shiromani Gurudwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC),
pp. 243-44.
14. Harjot
Oberoi. The Construction of Religious
Boundaries: Culture, Identity and Diversity in the Sikh Tradition. New
Delhi: Oxford University Press, 1994, p. 228.
15. Doris R. Jakobsh. Relocating
Gender In Sikh History: Transformation,
Meaning and Identity. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press, 2003, p. 26.
16. Ibid., p.
40.
17. J. S.
Grewal. The Sikhs Of The Punjab. New
Delhi: Cambridge University Press, 1994, p. 77.
18. Joginder
Singh. “Census Report 2001: Sikhs can learn a lot from it, if they wish to.” Spokesman, October 2004, pp. 13-16.
19. Doris R. Jakobsh. Relocating
Gender In Sikh History: Transformation,
Meaning and Identity. New Delhi: Oxford
University Press, 2003, p. 26.
20. Ibid., p.
27.
Previous Chapter | Table of Contents | Next Chapter
Copyright©2006 Baldev Singh. About the author
Print this Article
Email this Article
Comment on this Article