Issue 45 Vol II, August 15, 2007

H I S T O R Y

Akalis and Khalistan-5

IN the north west of India from the 16th century onwards Sikhism has played a central role in shaping society’s religious, social and cultural ethos. It has impacted politics too. Noted historian Professor J.S. Grewal whose research and writings have shaped generations of scholars traces some of the aspects of Sikhism and its influence in a five part article.

BOTH the Akalis and the protagonists of Khalistan invoked Sikh identity as essentially relevant for their political programmes.  It figured prominently in their political discourses and praxis.  What they shared was primarily the Khalsa or Singh identity. This identity was visible in their external appearance. They wore kesh and turban, kept a flowing beard and uncut hair, carried a kirpan, and wore kara and kachh. These four symbols begin with the letter ‘k’. The fifth ‘k’ is kangha or the comb tucked in the kesh for keeping the hair clean and orderly. The five Ks form the most important items in the Khalsa conception of rahit. Sant Jarnail Singh favoured the idea of bearing modern weapons in addition to a long sword. The strictest prohibition is on the use of tobacco in any form. Sant Jarnail Singh added drugs and alcohol to tobacco as the strictly prohibited items. On the first point, he was closer to the Khalsa of the eighteenth century. On the second, he was more in conformity with the Adi Granth.  Whereas the followers of Sant Jarnail Singh insist on amritdhari identity, involving the observance of the five Ks after the baptism of the double-edged sword (pahul or amrit), the Akalis prefer this identity but do not seriously object to what may be called the Singh identity which is less exacting than the amritdhari identity. Besides carrying the epithet ‘Singh’ in one’s name, by far the most important items of this identity are keeping the hair uncut, wearing turban, and refraining from the use of tobacco. Ordinarily, the Singhs of this description would wear kara and less frequently also kachh. Theoretical preference for amritdhari identity is thus common to both the Akalis and the Damdami Taksal, but they differ in actual practice.

Apart from external appearance, the Akalis and the Damdami Taksal observe distinct rites of passage: ceremonies connected with birth, marriage and death. On these, as on several other occasions, the Adi Granth is of central importance. No such ceremony can be performed without it. This is because the Adi Granth is not only the exclusive scripture of the Sikhs in the eyes of the Akalis and the followers of Sant Jarnail Singh but also the embodiment of the Guru. Therefore, Guru Granth Sahib is its proper title. This title and this attitude spring from the doctrine of the continuity of Guruship. Guru Nanak, the founder of the Sikh faith and the Sikh Panth, was followed by nine successors. Just as he chose Angad to be the Guru, and Guru Angad chose Amar Das, and so on, Guru Gobind Singh chose the Adi Granth to be the Guru. What ended with the death of Guru Gobind Singh was personal Guruship but not Guruship itself. The reverence and regard which the Sikhs of the ten Gurus gave them are due now to Guru Granth Sahib as well. This doctrine of Guru Granth, it must be added, is nearly 300 years old, and the equation of Gurbani with the Guru can be traced back to the sixteenth century. Since the Gurus have spoken through the Granth, the only valid source of Sikh ideas and ethics is Guru Granth Sahib. The known injunctions and practices of the ten Gurus are added to this source. Both the Akalis and the followers of Sant Jarnail Singh agree that the Adi Granth inculcates monotheism or worship of One God and rejects gods, goddesses, incarnations, and idols. Sikh doctrines and Sikh worship too, therefore, are distinctive.

The basic difference between the Akalis and the Sant was the latter’s conviction that the time for the use of arms had come. Even the Government of India could see this difference. At the time of the Operation Blue Star, Lt. General Sunderji was told by the government that there were two groups in the Golden Temple complex: one, that of Sant Jarnail Singh and the other, that of Sant Longowal. He was instructed to ensure that there was no fighting between the two groups. The ‘extremists’ were to be flushed out without any damage to the Golden Temple and the least possible damage to the Akal Takht. These instructions indicate that Sant Longowal and his followers were not seen as ‘extremists’.

Nevertheless, there has been a general tendency to bracket the Akalis with the militant secessionists. One reason for this could be the demand of the Akalis for political recognition on the basis of Sikh identity, especially the form in which this recognition was sought in 1945-6, that is, a sovereign state. This was never forgotten by their opponents after 1947. They saw the ultimate design of sovereignty in every important political move or demand of the Akalis.  Even at the national level there was a certain degree of distrust. There was a  tendency to see more in the political aspirations of the Akalis than what was actually there.

More important than the colonial background were the compromising gestures of the Akalis. One of the Akali demands in 1981 was the release of Sant Jarnail Singh. In 1982 he was persuaded to merge his morcha with the Akali dharmyudh.  No one could stop him from staying in one of the ‘hostels’ of the SGPC, where the government also could reach him if it wanted to, but towards the end of 1983 he shifted to the Akal Takht, which carried the implication of a tacit consent of the SGPC. Many of the Akali leaders showed willingness or even keenness to participate in the mortuary rites (bhogs) of some known or alleged militants.

One reason for Akali ambivalence could be the politics of the party in power in trying to use Sant Jarnail Singh against the Akalis.  According to Mark Tully and Satish Jacob, Giani Zail Singh had enabled Sanjay Gandhi to discover the Sant for breaking the Akali Dal after its electoral success in 1977. They looked for a religious issue that could be politicized and they identified the Sant Nirankaris.  After the death of twelve Sikhs at the hands of the Nirankaris on the Baisakhi day of 1978 at Amritsar, anti-Nirankari agitations were encouraged not by the Akalis but by the Congress party. The Dal Khalsa and Sant Jarnail Singh contested elections for the SGPC in 1979 against the Akali candidates. In 1980 Sant Jarnail Singh campaigned for Congress candidates, including R.L. Bhatia. Indira Gandhi herself admitted that he had supported a Congress candidate. After the murder of Baba Gurbachan Singh, the Sant Nirankari guru, in April 1980, Giani Zail Singh told the Parliament that Sant Jarnail Singh had nothing to do with the murder. After the murder of Lala Jagat Narain in September 1981, the Chief Minister of the Punjab wanted to get Sant Jarnail Singh arrested as a suspect. He was in a Haryana village at that time. Giani Zail Singh rang up Bhajan Lal to tell him not to let the Sant be arrested. When the Punjab government did arrest him in October, Giani Zail Singh told the Parliament that there was no evidence of his involvement in the murder. He was released. After the murder of Jathedar Santokh Singh at Delhi in December 1981, present at the memorial service were Giani Zail Singh, Rajiv Gandhi and Sant Jarnail Singh.

Even after 1981, when the Sant fell out with the government, Indira Gandhi continued to consult Giani Zail Singh as the President of India.  It was possibly due to his influence that Sant Jarnail Singh was not arrested after the murder of a Deputy Inspector General of police in April 1983 in the precincts of the Golden Temple.  When the government of Darbara Singh was suspended and the President’s rule was imposed in the Punjab due to the cold-blooded murder of some Hindu passengers in the first week of October 1983, a senior colleague of Darbara Singh claimed that President Zail Singh was in daily contact with the Sant.  The implication was that Darbara Singh’s downfall had been brought about through the Sant’s instrumentality.  Indira Gandhi maintained contact with Sant Jarnail Singh through  R.L. Bhatia who remained in regular contact with Bhai Amrik Singh till April 1984.

Finally, the Akali hobnobbing with the militants can be seen as compromisingly expedential.  For more than a decade now they have raised none of the issues which were so vital to them before the Operation Blue Star and which were sought to be resolved through the Rajiv-Longowal Accord. They do not talk even of autonomy for the states.  There may be many reasons for their silence. But their silence is eloquent: they had nothing to do with Khalistan. By now, the Shiromani Akali Dal is a political party with vested interests. Its leaders would rather ensure dynastic succession at all levels in the party and, if possible, in the state than think of Khalistan.

NOTES

1. J.S. Grewal, ‘The Gurdwara’, Religious Movements and Institutions in Medieval India, ed., J.S. Grewal, New Delhi: Oxford University Press, 2006.

2. J.S. Grewal, Sikh Ideology, Polity and Social Order, New Delhi: Manohar, 1996, pp. 133-9.

3. Mohinder Singh, The Akali Movement, Delhi: Macmillan, 1978.

4. The arguments generally used by those who wanted to prove that the Sikhs were Hindu can be summarized thus. To start with, Guru Nanak was a ‘Hindu’. The background of Sikhs was ‘Hindu’. The Sikhs and Hindus intermarry and eat together. The Sikhs observe caste distinctions in matrimony and commensality, like the other Hindus. They believe in the Vedas, if not also in the other Hindu scriptures, in addition to their own Granths. The Adi Granth is a popular version of Vedantic philosophy. The Dasam Granth composed by Guru Gobind Singh contains long compositions in praise of the Goddess and the incarnations of Vishnu and Shiva, particularly the human incarnations of Vishnu, that is, Rama and Krishna. The Khalsa was instituted by Guru Gobind Singh as a temporary measure for protecting the Hindus. The external appearance of the Khalsa did not justify a separate identity. At best these are half-truth; at worst, simple lies.

5. Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha, Ham Hindu Nahin (Pbi), Amritsar: Singh Brothers, 1995 (rpt.).  For a brief analysis, see J.S. Grewal, Historical Perspectives on Sikh Identity, Patiala: Punjabi University, 1997, pp. 81-100.

6. The views of W.H. McLeod, Harjot Oberoi, Daljeet Singh and G.S. Dhillon on Sikh identity have been discussed in the Historical Perspectives cited above.

7. Kahn Singh, Ham Hindu Nahin, Amritsar: SGPC, 1981 (rpt. of the 5th ed.). For a brief analysis of this work, see J.S. Grewal, ‘Nabha’s Ham Hindu Nahin: A Declaration of the Sikh Ethnicity, Sikh Identity: Continuity and Change, ed., Pashaura Singh and N. Gerald Barrier, New Delhi: Manohar, 2001 (Paperback), pp. 231-51.

8. K.L. Tuteja, Sikh Politics (1920-1940), Kurukshetra: Vishal Publications, 1984.

9. Sadhu Singh Hamdard, Azad Punjab (Urdu), Amritsar: 1943.

10. Indu Banga, ‘The Crisis of Sikh Politics (1940-47)’, Sikh History and Religion in the Twentieth Century, ed., Joseph T. O’Connell et al., Toronto: Centre for South Asian Studies, University of Toronto, 1988, pp. 233-55.

11. Gurbachan Singh and Lal Singh Giani, The Idea of the Sikh State, Lahore: Lahore Book Shop, 1946.  Relevant in this context are also the following: G. Adhikari, Sikh Homeland Through Hindu-Muslim-Sikh Unity, Bombay: 1944;  Harnam Singh, Punjab: The Homeland of the Sikhs, Lahore: 1945; Swarup Singh, The Sikhs Demand Their Homeland, London: 1946.

12. J.S. Grewal, The Sikhs of the Punjab (The New Cambridge History of India, II. 3), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990, pp. 181-204.

BACK