Fundamentalism and the Sikh Religious Tradition by T.N. Madan

wealth of water and hydel power, a power which every other state in India enjoyed under
the Constitution, etc.
The above being the socio-economic position, it was natural for the Punjab to
demand constitutional solutions, and that the settled territorial demarcation should not be
disturbed. No one could assert that these demands were not constitutional and legitimate,
or that there was anything unreasonable, fundamentalist or separatist about them. Yet, it
is a fact of Punjab history that none of those demands have been met or placed before the
Supreme Court, nor has the settled demarcation been allowed to remain intact. There
could be no Punjab problem, if the constitutional path had been followed by the Centre.
Accordingly one wonders what could be the course open to Punjab, except to
take to the path of negotiation and peaceful agitation from 1966 onwards. It is well
known that the Dharma Yudh morcha of 1982 was started by the Akalis only when the
Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi, on the one hand, invited the Akalis to have a talk with her,
and on the other hand, before the date of the meeting, got the water agreement concluded
among the three Congress Chief Ministers in December 1981, and got the waters case,
filed by the Akali Ministry, withdrawn from the Supreme Court. She decided to
inaugurate the digging of the disputed SYL Canal, and virtually banged the door of
negotiation against the Akalis, leaving them hardly any option but to start the peaceful
agitation.
Next is the question of law and order and introduction by the Congress of
Bhidranwale in the Punjab politics. Madan concedes this fact. The evident object was to
create a schism among the Akalis and break the unanimity of their demand and agitation.
At places, Madan, it appears, has resorted to making wrong statements. For example, he
states that the group that went to the meeting of the Nirankaris in 1978, was led by
Bhindranwala. It is a known fact that he was criticised for not doing so and remaining
aloof. Bhindranwala continued to support the Congress and its political candidates, even
while he opposed the Nirankaris for their attack on Sikhism. It is also incorrect that
Nirankaris have made any additions to Guru Granth; infact, the Nirankaris, on their own
admission, are not a Sikh sect, nor do they believe in the Sikh principles or the Guruship
of Guru Granth Sahib.
It is that whereas the Congress cannot deny its responsibility for introducing
Bhindranwala in Akali politics, the Akalis led by Longowal, continued to be nonviolent
throughout in their agitation. Now, a few words about Bhindranwala. There are some
incontrovertible facts about him. First, that he never raised any issue other than the four
demands and matters that had been initially and principally raised by the Akalis. The
second, that the reason for his popularity among the masses was that it appeared to them
that Bhindranwala would not let them down regarding their demands concerning river
waters, hydel power and recruitment to the Defence services, which for them were crucial
for their very living and future, and which, they felt somehow, the other Akali leaders
could, out of political expediency, barter away. As the Longowal Accord later showed,
this actually happened, after the death of Bhindranwala.
Here three other facts have also to be borne in mind. Madan states that
Bhindranwala was a violent character and had been charged twice for murder. He was
arrested only once and that after the murders both of the Nirankari Baba and Shri Jagat
Narain. After detailed investigations and interrogations, he was declared innocent and the
Home Minister made a statement in the Parliament to this effect." This makes it plain that