Selected Editorials - The Sikh Bulletin

years. Nor are we concerned about Hindu sensitivities while discussing those hymns in Guru Granth
Sahib that are critical of Hindu practices. We cannot wish the problems to go away. We have to face them
squarely. This editorial is invariably tied to the previous month’s editorial ‘Bani and Bana’ and should be
read in that context.
The Encyclopaedia of Sikhism published by The Punjabi University, Patiala defines Sikh, Singh and
Khalsa 2 . If we could dispassionately accept these definitions we will be on the road to ‘charhdi kala’.
There really is no other choice.
SIKH:
To quote from The Encyclopaedia, “The word Sikh goes back to Sanskrit sisya, meaning a learner or
disciple. In Pali, sisya became sissa. The Pali word sekha (also sekkha) means a pupil or one under
training in a religious doctrine (sikkha, siksa). The Punjabi form of the word was Sikh.”
With the passage of time common noun sikh became proper noun Sikh used exclusively for the followers
of Guiru Nanak. In this definition there is no reference to a person’s appearance. To quote from the
previous month’s editorial, “Let us take ourselves to the time of Guru Nanak. Guru is giving a sermon.
Who is he giving the sermon to In his audience are Hindus and Muslims, adherents of the two dominant
faiths of that time. Did he treat them differently from each other or did he treat them as humans eager to
make sense out of this life Did he see Hindu and Muslim faces or Human faces” He was, clearly,
addressing his Sikhs. Bhatti Sardar Rai Bular and Mardana were among his Sikhs as were, later, Bhai
Nand Lal, Bhai Kanhaiya, Kaura Mall, Des Raj, Dina Nath and Bhai Vasti Ram. 3
As time went on changes took place. Children born into Sikh families were automatically considered as
Sikhs without any formal initiation rite. One may consider that as their birth right. Among some Hindu
families the eldest son was raised as a kesadhari Sikh while the rest of the family with cut hair came to be
called sahajdhari. That word for a cleanshaven Sikh is inappropriate. The Encyclopaedia of Sikhism
defines ‘sahaj’ as “…a state of mental and spiritual equipoise without the least intrusion of ego…” Not
many ‘sahajdharis’ would meet that criteria. More appropriate term, as opposed to kesadhari, would be
non-kesadhari (mona). A person converting from one faith to another obviously has to undergo some
initiation rite. So far that rite is ‘Khande di Pahul’.
SINGH:
To quote from The Encyclopaedia of Sikhism, “Singh, from Sanskrit sinha for lion, is an essential
component of the name for a Sikh male. Every Sikh male name must end with 'Singh'. Historically, this
was so ordained by Guru Gobind Singh on the Baisakhi day, 30 March 1699, when he inaugurated the
Khalsa, They were to adopt the five prescribed emblems, including kesa or unshorn hair and share a
common end-name 'Singh' in token of having joined the self-abnegating, martial and casteless fellowship
of the Khalsa…While 'Sikh' is a spiritual appellation, 'Singh' has socio-political overtones in addition.”
Historically the word Singh is not unique to the Sikhs. It predates the Guru period. India’s current
Foreign Minister, Natwar Singh, is not a Sikh. Thus all Singhs are not Sikhs. The dilemma is should all
Sikhs be Singhs Dr. Harbans Lal is a Sikh, just as Bhai Nand Lal was a Sikh. Dr. Harbans Lal’s Sikh
credentials are accepted by the Sikh establishment in India and abroad, including the so called ‘Jathedars’,
SGPC, Sikh faculty of Universities in Panjab, Institute of Sikh Studies, Chandigarh, Sikh Review,
Calcutta and Dr. Chahal’s Institute for Understanding Sikhism, Laval. He even held the position of
President of All India Sikh Student Federation during his student days in Panjab. He participates and
leads in various national and international Sikh gatherings. Similarly, Alice Basarke in Canada and
Claudia Martins in Brazil consider themselves Sikhs and I do accept all of them as such.
KHALSA:
23