The Sikh Self-Definition and Bhagat Bani

Pashaura Singh’s M.A. Thesis:Pashaura Singh arrived in Calgary, Canada in 1984 to serve as a Granth. There he came in contact with Dr. Ronald W. Neufeldt, a Eurocentric "instant" Sikh scholar who believed in the McLeodian paradigm of Sikh research and worked as a professor of Religious Studies, University of Calgary, Calgary Canada. The other two professors who influenced Pashaura Singh were:

1. Dr. Harold Coward, Dept. of Religious Studies, University of Calgary
2. Dr. Inder Nath Kher (a Panjabi) Dept. of English, University of Calgary

All the above mentioned professors or supervisors of Pashaura Singh were non-Sikhs, and had no orientation towards Sikh traditions, culture, values, and other. Professor Coward has published a book on Jung and Eastern Thought (1985), the others were not “Sikh Scholars” but were willing to help a Sikh student with a MacLeodian paradigm. So, Dr. Neufeldt, Dr. Kher and Dr. Coward with their “role dancing” graduate student decided to produce a thesis based on Guru Bani and Guru Granth Sahib. It must be emphasized that none of the supervisors was a Sikh or could read Guru Granth Sahib,

The main chapters in this Eurocentric thesis are: 1. The issue of Sikh self-definition in relation to the "received" tradition of the Bhagat Bani included in the Guru Granth Sahib.
2. Comments of Sikh Gurus on Bhagat Bani of Farid and Kabir.
3. After including the Bhagat Bani into Guru Granth Sahib, Gurus wanted to emphasize their agreement and disagreement with the poet-saints.
4. The views of Kabir and Farid which verge on "the erroneous" were corrected by the Gurus, so as to develop a Sikh self-definition.
5. No process of integration of the Bhagat Bani in the Guru Granth Sahib was based on whether the Bani harmonizes or disharmonizes with Guru’s thoughts. If it disharmonized the Gurus took the liberty of correcting and editing it by providing an alternative commentary to cultivate a particular Sikh view.

Main Points Covered in the Thesis

1. The first canonical collection known as the Adi Granth was compiled under the direct supervision of Guru Arjan and installed in Harimandir, Amritsar on August 6, 1604.
2. Guru Nanak may have written his Shabad while travelling in India or possibly abroad (pg.3).
3. Guru Arjan, while editing Guru Granth Sahib, dropped seven hymns of Kabir and two of Namdev. Guru Arjan seems to have made some alterations to do a “recasting of certain Namdev hymns, so as to fit them into the content of the teaching of the Gurus”
4. Sikh Gurus had disagreement with Shaikh Farid on his notions of resurrection, the flaming hell, and terrible retribution on unbelievers and fear of judgement by God, death, human birth and life.
5. Gurus by criticizing Farid created boundaries between Gurmat and Sufi life and thought.

Bani Kabir Ji Ki

1. Kabir’s social background as a low caste weaver makes it likely that he was more or less illiterate (pg.70).
2. Kabir seems to have inherited his misogynist bias from Nath – panthic tradition which regarded women as tigresses. “They always sought men to prey upon them”. Kabir refers to woman as Kali nagrini, (a black cobra), Kundra Naraka Ka (the pit of hell), Juthani Jagata Ki (the refuse of the world).

Discussion It is very clear from the information cited above, that Pashaura Singh is doing his Eurocentric role dance to bring “correct” interpretation to Guru Granth Sahib. To him, scriptures are not “Dhur Ki Bani” but something to play with, and provide interpretation to the verbal and written behaviour of Kabir, Farid, Guru Nanak, Guru Amar Das and Guru Arjan.

Dr. P. Singh is applying empiricist, and logical-positive McLeodian paradigm to develop the argument of including Bhagat Bani into Guru Granth Sahib. He fails to comment that if the Bhagat Bani needed explanation, why in the first place did Guru Arjan include it into the Holy Granth. It is very clear that Pashaura Singh is using his Sikh identity paradigm to "understand" Farid and Kahir. He is also saying that Guru Arjan, after including the Bhagat Bani (Note: no motivation of such inclusion is given, perhaps that was kept for his Ph.D. thesis) wanted to create a “good fit”. It must be pointed out Pashaura Singh does not say that Bani of the other four groups was included to attract them to Sikhism (for more detailed analysis readers are advised to read ‘Planned Attack on AAD Sri Guru Granth Sahib Academics or blasphemy, edited by Bachiltar Singh Grani and published by International Centre of Sikh Studies, Chandigarh, 1994’.)

Comments

In 1979, Graduate Theological Union, Berkley, California, published a book entitled Sikh Studies. It was edited by Mark Juergansmeyer and N.G. Barrier. This book included an article of Dr. H. McLeod. Dr. McLeod raises these questions about the Sikh scriptures.

1. Have these scriptures been subjected to searching academic scrutiny and analysis?
2. Should they be examined by Sikh, or foreigners?
3. Will this examination be regarded as sacrilegious interference?

Dr. McLeod feels that for the sake of bringing respectability to Sikh studies, these scriptures should be subjected to analysis using social science methods of the West. Well, he found a willing student in Pashaura Singh to do that in his M.A. and Ph.D. thesis.

It is painful to imagine that Prof. Pashawra Singh was also involved in this project. If Sikhs had read through McLeod’s intentions in 1979, something could have been done to stop this “historian in a hurry” with his role-dancing disciples.

It is about time that Sikh scholars should read everything that is written by these Eurocentric scholars. In North America there are five places (U.B.C., U of Toronto, University of Calgary, Columbia University and University of Berkley) where “culture of fitters of Sikh religion” is still manifesting itself.