Issue 41 Vol II, June 15, 2007

F O C U S

Sikhism in Crisis
Proliferation of Cults and Sects in Punjab
Dr. Jaspal Singh

Primitive man in remote antiquity worshipped many forces of nature out of fear or to seek boons in times of adversity. In many cultures he personified these forces as distinct gods. In course of time this polytheism gave way to monotheism that is belief in one [omniscient] all-powerful God. Thus the main religions of the world naming Judaism, Christianity, and Islam came up with their own versions of faith in one God. Some of the other religions particularly Hinduism still believed in the existence of many gods though a few of its sects have become monotheistic in course of time.

Within the pale of Hinduism a new religion emerged in sixteenth century, which was formally codified towards the end of the 17th century in the form of the Khalsa. Since the believers of this faith were called Sikhs or ‘disciples’ so it assumed the name of Sikhism. This new religion is also monotheistic like Islam and it took about two centuries for it to fully acquire the present shape and norm. After the demise of the 10th Guru in early eighteenth century, Sikhism became a biblio-centric religion, now believing in its scriptures that were anointed as the Guru Granth Sahib.

In course of time many aberrations and immoral practices appeared in the ‘faith’ leading to large scale disturbances in the first quarter of the 20th century. Sikhs all over Punjab were up in arms against the custodians of the gurdwaras, who by now had completely degenerated into immoral lumpens. This movement is called Gurdwara Sudhar Lehar (religious reform movement), which eventually succeeded in its aims, and the gurdwaras were liberated from the clutches of immoral masands. An apex democratic body called the SGPC (Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee) was devised to manage the gurdwaras. Consequently Sikhism became one of the most modern and democratic religions. It rapidly spread in many sections of people in Punjab. But as time passed Sikhism again became a victim of corruption and other noxious activities of its new custodians. Castism, which has been banned in Sikhism, continued in the same old form. Apart from this, the patrons of the faith displayed the same Brahmamical arrogance and used the religion to perpetuate their socio-political hegemony in the state. Most of the members of SGPC were drawn from one dominant caste of Punjab and in most of the gurdwaras in the villages. The management remained in the hands of dominant farming castes particularly the Jatts. The lower castes especially the scheduled castes and the untouchables were allowed in the gurdwaras as menials or sevadars while the financial and managerial work was monopolised by the dominant farming castes.

In many villages lower castes are not even allowed to sit in the main halls rather they are made to sit outside in the verandas. Secondly, many poor people have problems associated with their financial condition, health and family discords for which they seek magical treatments. Such people think that some godman with ‘divine powers’ is more potent to solve their problems than the inanimate scriptures [sculptures]. So in order to get rid of their distress and to seek boons these people visit the various ‘saints’ and munis. The gurdwaras being dominated by the dominant castes, the poor and the disadvantaged section of the populace makes to the deras (hermitages or centers of deviational cults) where they find greater solace. Attitude of the managers and sevadars at these centers is more humane and compassionate than what is usually found in the gurdwaras and temples especially those managed by the SGPC.

Some of the main deras that have made a mark in Punjab are:  Dera Radha Soami, Beas; Dera Sacha Sauda, Sirsa; Dera Namdhari, Bhaini; Nirankari Mission, Divia Jyoti Jagriti Sansthan, Dera Bhaniaranwala and the Sikh Deras like Damdami Taksal and Dera Begowal. Apart from these deras there are scores of gurdwaras patronised and managed by scores of sants of different denominations. All these religious and semi-religious centres exercise a lot of influence among the people. All those disenchanted with the main stream conventional religions patronise such centres. Consequently a parallel religious movement has come into existence that has provided legitimacy to such deviational varieties of faith. As hundreds of thousand people visit these places, they bring a lot of wealth to them. With wealth and the faithful multitudes comes the power.

The importance of deras in a democratic set-up where the numbers count more than anything else is clear. Most of the deras have significant following in certain areas that can tilt the balance of power in an election. That is why politicians make a beeline for the dera heads. This practice is the main reason behind the arrogance and the pretentious ostentation of the godman. In fact, politicians are mainly responsible for degrading public morality by giving importance to pseudo godmen, astrologers and other voodoo personalities. The present chief minister of Punjab with pretentious of being a ‘devout Sikh’, has visited almost all the dera chiefs in the state some of which believe in anti-Sikh rituals and has visited some voodoo oracular charlatans in order to seek electoral success or to ward off evil spirits which were supposed to have haunted him when he was in adversity due to his own misdeed. This is true of many other Indian politicians including the late Rajiv Gandhi who went all the way to Mathura to be touched by the foot on his head by a voodoo man hanging on  to a tree.

Now such antics of the top politicians give unnecessary credence to the “holy” pretenders and hypocrites. As has been mentioned earlier, the failure of the mainstream conventional religions has given an impetus to the non-conventional deviational sects and cults. With a huge scheduled caste population in Punjab (nearly 34%) such centres have attracted millions of followers with a lot of political clout in a democratic polity. The SGPC on the other hand has remained riddled with scams and misappropriation of funds. Its offices function like government offices and many officials are steeped in corruption. It is natural for the socially and economically backward people to strive for alternative spiritual centres which are ostensibly egalitarian in nature. The hypocrisy and duplicity of the leaders have further disappointed the people. Whenever a dera does not support a particular political party, it is debunked by its leaders. But when the same dera declares its support to the same political party a few years later it is glorified in superlative terms.

Political clout of some of the deras is one thing; the other is that some of them have become dens of black marketers, smugglers, corrupt officials and politicians to disguise their immoral activities and to launder their black money by using a spiritual garb. Now the question is how can Sikhism win back its lost followers? For this Sikhism requires another reform movement. True spirit of Sikhism has to be brought back. The SGPC requires huge structural changes. Its caste and communal composition has to be changed. The gurdwaras have to be liberated from the new masands. Last but not least the down-trodden section of society that has discarded the gurdwaras and has adopted new cultish and sectarian practices should be brought back to the fold by sharing power with them.

The finances and management of the gurdwaras should not be the monopoly of one dominant caste of Punjab. Unless there is an equitable distribution of duties, responsibilities and authority, the disadvantages sections cannot be brought back to the mainstream. Apart from this, religious piety, compassion and belief in humanistic values have again to be inculcated. The crisis of Sikhism is really more serious than its present day custodians visualize.

BACK

Whither Agricultural Growth
Gobind Thukral

IT is a dilemma that beats the present Indian government. The rosy picture presented after three years of United Progressive Alliance rule by Mrs. Sonia Gandhi and Dr Manmohan Singh apart, even the best economic minds have little to offer for farm front. UPA should get credit for good economic growth of over 8.5 per cent annual and a bit more sensible secular rule than its predecessor the National Democratic government under BJP. But it’s not an all around growth as agriculture stands neglected with less than two per cent. The fruit of this high growth as Union Panchayat Minister Mani Shankar Aiyar admits, has not tickled down to those who need it most, the poor. Rising prices, falling employment and grinding poverty stare the country, claiming to be third emerging economic power in the world.

Accelerating growth in terms of Gross Domestic Product in agriculture and allied sectors to around 4% is not an easy task when actual growth as per the rosiest projections for 2005-06 and 2006-07 would be below 2% for the full five year period. It was only 1% per annum in the first three years of the 10th Plan.

Farmers face adverse demand conditions. Agricultural growth been low in the last decade and the prices received for agricultural products are not keeping pace with the costs or the general price level. Consequently profitability has declined.  This means the farmers and the farm labour have less money in their pockets to spend on consumer goods. Domestic demand of goods can not increase unless 60 per cent of the Indians have more money to spare. The Planning Commission has suggested that 4% growth of agriculture will not be attainable from the demand side unless aggregate GDP growth is much higher than 8%.

Some of the steps already taken, such as the recently introduced National Rural Employment Guarantee Programme could  help the demand  to pick up during the 11th  Plan if its get implemented properly.  Reports indicate a tardy progress in this much hyped scheme.  Corruption is eating away at least fifty per cent money marked for this scheme. Expanding access and improving quality of government schools and health facilities can help by reducing the need for private expenditure on these items by farmers, lower income groups.   Some of this expenditure could generate demand for agriculture. A very large private expenditure shift has occurred over the last decade from food to health, education and conveyance. Sadly the quality of government schools and health institutions has gone down.  How to reverse this trend is another uphill task.

The government is depending upon improved rural connectivity envisaged through Bharat Nirman to trigger growth of an integrated national market where rural people can meet each other’s demand. This again is not happening.

Since there is no dramatic technological breakthrough comparable to the “green revolution” in sight, there is no expectation of any dramatic increase in production. In fact, the potential of existing technology in case of cereals, pulses and oilseeds is not being exploited fully. Productivity is low and farmers do not feel encouraged. There is a bagful policy distortion.

Several National Commissions on farmers have drawn attention to the knowledge deficit that hampers agricultural productivity. Agriculture universities are no longer hub of enthusiastic farm extension workers and researchers.  The Planning Commission admits, “The result is that farming practices in large parts of the country are sub-optimal. Soil testing to determine optimal nutrient requirements is hardly practiced and fertilizer application is often highly unbalanced with excessive use of nitrogenous fertilisers, often leading to a negative effect on productivity.” Punjab and Haryana are typical cases in this line.

Lack of credit at reasonable rates is a continual problem. The cooperative credit system is collapsing. This failure is resulting into excessive dependence on informal sources usually at exorbitant interest rates. This is at the root of distress and suicides.  But the tragically neither the Commission nor the government are not looking at the failed model of farm development. They would tinker and wish like witch doctors to see the cure comes about.

There are suggesting diversification into horticulture and floriculture and that too without any structural changes in the relation between agriculture and non-agriculture. Diversification requires effective marketing linkages, supported by modern marketing practices including introduction of grading, post-harvest management and cold chains.  Where on earth Indian farmers have money to bring about this change that costs many times more that what traditional farming does?

Government says that contract farming is an effective way of attracting corporate investors to help establish these linkages with markets and also provide farmers with necessary inputs, extension and other advice.  Since there is not regulatory framework, farmers would ultimately become drudge labour after their lands have been usurped.

With an estimated 80 million hectares needing treatment, and average expenditure of Rs.10, 000 per hectare, the total requirement of funds is about Rs.80, 000 crore. For this magnitude of funding to be feasible during the 11th Plan, it is absolutely essential that these programmes be converged with or at least supplemented by the Employment Guarantee programme funding local level schemes which conserve moisture and recharge ground water.

The failure of high tech commercial ‘Green Revolution is clearly evident in stagnant agricultural production. There is an escalating spiral of ecological troubles, persistently rising input costs, and mounting   farmer indebtedness and suicides. Holistic farming involves knowledge, native wisdom, and labour, rather than external industrial inputs or large per capita finance - with their attendant high costs and risks of indebtedness. It can create significantly higher employment opportunities in the rural sector, thereby halting and reversing migration from rural to urban areas.  It benefits the small and marginal farmers, who are the “Aam Admi" of the farming community. Does it not look ridiculous to see Punjab chief minister Parkash Singh Badal spending an extra rupee five crore on new latest model of cars to add his 60 already cars with him when farmers are committing suicides. Government funds and resources should therefore be made available to the farmers in proportion to their percentage in the rural population to honour the promises made in the Common Minimum Programme of the UPA government.

BACK

G-8 Summit: Edifice of Confrontation
Dr Swaraj Singh writes from Washington

THE just concluded summit of the G-8 countries in Germany showed that the world is facing growing divisions and confrontations. Before the start and after the end, one issue dominated the summit, which was the growing divide between Russia and America over the issue of installing the American missile interceptor system in Poland and the Czech Republic. The other issue that showed disagreement was the issue of global warming and greenhouse gases. Europe and America have major differences over the issue of environment. And other issue was of aid to Africa. It was decided to give 60 billion dollars in aid to Africa. The aid agencies such as Oxafarm are very disappointed because the promises made in Green Eagle in the G-8 Summit in 2005 were not fulfilled and no new money was promised. Russia threatened to veto if the issue of Kosovo’s independence from Serbia was brought in the Security Council, therefore, Kosovo was not discussed in the summit.

As opposed to the rich countries, the developing countries, invited as observers, showed unity. The Chinese President Hu Jin Tao praised the Indian Prime Minister Dr. Manmohan Singh and expressed enthusiasm over the oncoming visit of Dr. Manmohan Singh to China. China, India, Brazil, Mexico, and South Africa may form a group called G-5. This group can better represent the interests of the developing countries.

The policies of globalization continue to face growing opposition from the people of the world. Thousands turned out to protest against globalization and the summit. Sometimes, the protests became violent and the protestors and some policemen were injured. President Bush was met by the protestors wherever he went. He may easily win the title of the most disliked American President.

President Putin started stoutly criticizing the proposed installation of the American missile interceptor system in Poland and the Czech Republic. Russia has gone on the offensive. Russia is asserting and projecting its power and influence. The rising prices of oil and gas and America being bogged down in Iraq have given Russia a big advantage in its competition with America. America and the European Union seem to be on the defensive and showed a wavering response to Russia’s offensive. President Bush at first criticized Russia for backing from the democratic reforms, but later changed his tone and adopted an apologetic attitude. He said that Russia is not an enemy and Putin is a friend and America wants to protect Europe from a potential Iranian missile attack. President Putin said that if we want to protect Europe from the Iranian missiles, then the best place to install the interceptor missiles should be Azerbaijan and not Poland or the Czech Republic. President Bush said that experts will study this proposal, but later on, in Poland, he said that America will stick to the decision of installing the system in Poland and the Czech Republic.

President Putin has made it clear that Russia will point its new RS-24 missiles at Europe if America goes ahead with its plans to install the interceptor system. No country has the capability of intercepting the RS-24 missiles and Russia claims that they will not have such capability in the next forty years. The RS-24 missiles are capable of carrying multiple nuclear warheads. This means that if Russia decides to fire the missile at any European country that will virtually mean wiping that country off of the world map. Naturally, the European countries are very concerned about this.

On the issue of the environment, there was disagreement between Europe and America. America refused to agree to any mandatory limits on the greenhouse gases. In the end, German President Angela Merkel’s suggestion that greenhouse gases should be reduced by 50% by the year 2050 was included in the final statement. We should also remember that America did not ratify the Kyoto agreement. President Bush said that there should be no mandatory limit on greenhouse gases and each country should determine its own goal.

In 2005, during the G-8 Summit in Green Eagle, the rich countries agreed to give 0.7% of their GDP as aid to the poor countries. However, they did not keep their promise. It is clear that the rich countries are only concerned about their own interests and their expressed concern about the poor countries is not genuine. It is increasingly becoming clear that the divisions and confrontations between the G-8 countries are growing rapidly and the western-dominated world order is fast coming to an end. A new world order based upon equal relations between the different countries is on the horizon.

[Sawraj Singh, MD F.I.C.S. is chairman, Washington State Network for Human Rights]

BACK