100% Hindu, 100% Punjabi
“What are you?” is usually one of the first questions that comes up in conversation when two British Asians meet for the first time. This means, “What is your religion and/or ethnicity?”
Being a Hindu whose mother tongue is Punjabi, I call myself a HP, which stands for Hindu Punjabi. I would have thought that this is quite straightforward to understand. However over the years I have come across so many people who have totally incorrect ideas of what HP means, and have had to explain it to many people (particularly Gujarati Hindus). I am writing this to help remove mistaken ideas about the definition of HP that may exist amongst fellow Hindus.
August 20th, 2006 at 9:21 pm
Hiya! My name is Namita Selhi and I am also a HP who has come across the same ridiculous assumptions at school and suprisingly faced the same ignorance at university. I just wanted to thank you for clarifying what HP really means and confirming that we aren’t a sauce, or 1/2 hindu and 1/2 sikh, but in fact share our religion with gujaratis and share our mother tongue with sikhs. Hindus who come from the punjab=HP and Hindus who come from gujrat=gujarati.
August 21st, 2006 at 10:34 am
Hello, I think i totally understand what HP’s go through.. ok you think that people are ignorant about HP’s? I am a Sindhi Hindu.. many of you probably don’t know what that is..
Sind, which is infact a neighbouring state to Punjab, was inhabited prdominantly by hindus and sikhs pre-1947. It was the creation of the islamic state of Pakinstan that drove the majority of non muslims out of sindh and seek refuge in India. For many years Sindhs have been regarded as refugees and homeless where as infact they have settled all over the world and become very sucessful.
I think the point that I am trying to make is that Hindu’s come from everywhere and we as people have historically felt comfortable with “sticking to our own”. Through education and integration i hope this can change.
Jai hind.
August 21st, 2006 at 1:49 pm
“Sind, which is infact a neighbouring state to Punjab, was inhabited prdominantly by hindus and sikhs pre-1947.”
No Sindh was a Muslim majority province but had a substantial Hindu population of 30% and the district of Thar Parkar near India’s border used to be majority Hindu and still is, if Sindhi Hindus had any foresight they would have insisted on a referendum for the district and annexed it to India just like Muslims insisted on a referndum in Sylhet district of Assam and annexed it to Pakistan by winning the referendum marginally.
The plight of Sindhi Hindus has its roots in things that happened way before Partition, as early as 1925 Savarkar had warned Sindhi Hindus that separation of Sindh from the Bombay Presidency would be disastrous for them since it would make them a religious minority in a Muslim majority province but no one listened to him and there was no strong anti partition movement against the creation of a separte Sindh province by Sindhi Hindus like there was in Bengal when it was partitioned (but it was later reunited due to strong Hindu opposition).
August 21st, 2006 at 2:28 pm
just want to say this is an excellent article.It just about sums up everything I’m always telling people when they ask you what is the HP!…and you are right, it’s often the gujratis(no disrespect) who have this assumption that we are sikh whereas being hindu doesnt mean you have to speak hindi.its a culture, one of the languages is hindi, the others being punjabi,gujrati and many others that im not knowlegable about.
Namaste
August 22nd, 2006 at 1:48 pm
Namaste ,
I am Gujerati speaking, although I am first and foremost a South African Hindu. It is true to say that the Gujerati speaking Hindus often have this uncanny notion that everything Hindu must surely be Gujerati. This is usually due to ignorance and often the inability to see the wider picture. The picture being HINDU and not some nationalistic, ethnic or linguistic pride in an ethnic or geographical background.
Having said that I do believe that your primary object is surely to propagate Hinduism amongst Hindus and non Hindus alike. So , whilst we should set records straight we must not forget our primary goal , which is the promotion and propagation of Hinduism.
At some future date is it possible for you to put together an article on Sind and its widely scattered diaspora ?
Keep up with the good work. Your articles are informative and you should consider increasing your readership further afield.
God Bless.
Hari Om.
22/08/2006
August 22nd, 2006 at 9:05 pm
I am a Gujarati Hindu and I understand what a Hindu Punjabi is. That is probably because I grew up in India and I understand that not all Punjabis are sikhs. (Though I do not differentiate sikhs) Because they are Hindu descent anyway. Being a Hindu, I am proud of sikhs because they have been the protectors of Hindus over the last several centuries.
As for Hindus living in Punjab, I don’t see them as different to any Hindus elsewhere from India.
The trouble with young Gujaratis (and no offence brothers and sisters) is that they have not learnt much about India from their parents and therefore they do not understand how religion in India is spread across
August 23rd, 2006 at 10:46 am
Reference the statement above that “[S]ikhs […] have been the protectors of Hindus over the last several centuries”, I refer readers to Chapter 8, “Are Sikhs Hindus?”, of Koenraad Elst’s book “Who Is A Hindu?” Here, he argues, like Ram Swarup before him (see Swarup’s “Hindu-Sikh Relationship”), that not only is this view a gross misrepresentation of history, it also does a considerable disservice to the cause of Hindu-Sikh unity. The relevant extract is section 8.6, “Sikhism as the sword-arm of Hinduism”, available online at:
http://koenraadelst.voiceofdharma.com/books/wiah/ch8.htm
As for “[t]he trouble with young Gujaratis”, I recall playing tabla at a British mandir event some years back and being questioned later by three elderly Gujarati Hindu ladies there about my origins; my explanations were met with complete confusion as they too failed to grasp the idea that one could be Hindu without necessarily being Gujarati. The trouble is not with youth, but with a Hindu society that is so insular that it fails to even recognise its own - how exactly are these youths to know any better when those responsible for teaching them are themselves so ignorant?
August 24th, 2006 at 11:59 am
A funny article, but quite true. I’m a Gujarati, and up until a few years ago I was confused about this kind of thing, thinking that HP was some Sikh Gujarati hybrid or something.
Of course, its another matter altogether whether Sikhs are Hindus. Most do NOT consider themselves to be, but there is still a significant minoroty of Sikhs (e.g. unorthodox sects) that consider themselves part of Hindus. Its kind doing a disservice to them to consider all Sikhs as non-Hindus.
August 26th, 2006 at 7:16 am
There are no 100% hindus now days.Every body anywhere in the world in including Bharath desh (india).Dressing,language and Sadaacharam(Culture) those we lost nowadays.Hinduism means living sytle.Our minds,our thinkings and works are like forign style like britishers.Not like hindus.
August 28th, 2006 at 9:32 pm
^^^ The way you describe it, you make it sound as if we can’t take up aspects of knowledge or style that have originated from other cultures or civilisations and still be ‘proper’ Hindu.
That, in my opinion, is not what being a Hindu is about. Hinduism can absorb new streams of culture, and still maintain its sense of Self. It does not require an outright rejection of anything. The Rig-Veda says ‘Let good thougts come from ALL sides’.
August 29th, 2006 at 11:20 am
Echo above - ‘aa no bhadraah krtavo yantu vishwatah’. Orthodoxy such as that espoused above is somewhat a foreign concept to Hinduism, as I understand it.
September 3rd, 2006 at 9:29 pm
Good article.
The South African entry, Mansukhkaka says he is 1st SA Hindu, well her can walk into any place in the world, and they wont say, hey that South African, theyll say, hey that INDIAN!!
Im Guji, and these people can be outrite daffors.
I agree with an eralier entry that Sikhism=part of Hinduism(roughly) . Francois Gautier and Khuswant Singh are of the opinion that they will reintergrate.
In terms of style and thinking,
Pramukh Swami Maharaj espouses 4 things: Bhojan(food) Bhasha(language-SAnskrit and vernacular) Bhusha(dress) and bhajan(worship). These 4 things help maintain our culture while absorbing best from the west
September 6th, 2006 at 3:23 pm
In my own experience (in the UK), many Hindu Panjabis are desperate to associate with the supposedly ‘martial Sikhs’. Hence this article is quite refreshing.
September 6th, 2006 at 6:24 pm
I’d say the above is not only a Hindu Punjabi issue - I’ve seen a number of Gujarati Hindu youths in Britain wearing a kara and trying to speak some kind of pidgin Punjabi.
September 7th, 2006 at 8:46 am
A refreshing article. The stigma attached to Hindu Punjabi’s attempting to adopt the Sikh religion is very common, especially from my own experiences. I am delighted this article has addressed the issue and shed some light for the hordes of naive individuals I’ve come across over the years. Our cultures may vary, but Hindu Punjabi’s are very much Hindu.
September 18th, 2006 at 11:25 am
Firstly Hindu “Punjabis” should stop calling themselves “HPs”.
You don’t see Gujarati Hindus call themselve “HGs”
I think the issue is amplified largely due to Gujaratis being ignorant that not all punjabi’s are necessarily sikhs and Hindus (who speak punjabi) don’t seem to do much to reinforce their Hinduness as opposed to their Punjabiness with the rest of the Hindus.
BTW - Most of the Hindus “who speak punjabi” who I know anyway- do happen to be distinctly very Hindu and not of the karra wearing, binge drinking bhangra muffin sort.
In short this article is an excellent start at addressing those misconceptions.
October 9th, 2006 at 11:04 pm
I am so proud of this article! I feel and get the same response (sorry to say, it’s the gujji’s again) but I’m a Hindu-Bengali. When I say Hindu-Bengali, I am not trying to dilute the fact that I am Hindu, just that I am proud to be Bengali and proud to be Hindu! Not all Bengali’s (Even Bangladeshi’s - which I am) are muslim, Hindu’s were in Bengal way before the muslims invaded and converted many in the east (Bangladesh bit) and not all of us were converted.
I am sick of (yes… sorry to say it’s the gujji’s) some people asking if I am half muslim and half hindu, I’m 100% Hindu and I’m 100% Bengali! Some thick people do not realise Bengali is a language & culture (A purely sanskrit derived language) and Hinduism is my religion.
I just feel better that there was an article highlighting how Hindu’s get mistreated even by their own!
oh yeh, biggup all da Bengali, Punjabi, Gujji, Paki, South & North Indian, & non-indian Hindus!
Nuff love
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:44 pm
punjabi’s look the best though
May 10th, 2007 at 4:37 am
The Punjabi Muslim were majority in united British Punjab before 1947. The Punjabi Hindu were second majority and follow by Sikhs. After partition the Punjabi Muslim majority area got Pakistan. While their Hindu and Sikh brethren got state of Punjab and haryana in India.
May 18th, 2007 at 11:35 am
I DONT AGREE THAT YOU ARE 100 % EITHER PUNJABI OR HINDU:
NOT PUNJABI, BECAUSE MOST OF PUNJABI HINDUS, LIVING IN THE CITIES, HAVE DISREGARDED PUNJABI AS THEIR MOTHER TONGUE AND PREFER HINDI OR ENGLISH- AND DELIBERATELY WRITE SAY THAT THEIR MOTHER TONGUE IS HINDI, AT LEAST WHEN IT COMES TO VOTING IN THE CENSURE RECORDS, WHEN ITS A MATTER OF GIVING OFFICIAL STATUS TO PUNJABI. THEY EQUATE PUNJABI WITH SIKHISM AND RESIST IT. THAT IS THE SAD REALITY, THEY ARE DECEIVING THEMSELVES. PATHETIC REALLY.
NOT A HINDU, B/C THEY ARE DIFFERENT FROM THE REST OF INDIAN HINDUS, BEING SO CLOSE TO SIKHISM AND ISLAM OF PUNJAB, THEIR WAYS ARE ALSO DIFFERENT. THE HINDU OF TAMIL NAIDU/ASSAM HAS ALMOST NOTHING IN COMMON WITH THOSE OF PUNJAB. THE ONLY THING COMMON ARE SOME RECENTLY (RETROACTIVELY) ADDED ASPECTS OF A HINDU ‘RELIGION’ BY THE NEO-ADVAITIN NATIONALIST OF 19TH CENTURY- SWAMI VIVEKANANDA/AUROBINDO ETC.
May 18th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
Sikh why are you covering up the fact that it was Sikhs who used the movement for Punjabi subha as a cover to get a Sikh majority state, if you guys were all true Punjabis and Hindus all not 100% Punjabi then why did you agree to let go many of the Punjabi speaking areas to Haryana and Himachal in your quest for a Sikh majority state?
You sound like a big idiot to me, who are you to decide that they are not Hindus, you loser what do you call common festivals that both Punjabi Hindus and Tamil Hindus celebrate, even the new year fell on the same day for both, it seems to me you are threatened by the fact that Hindus are beginning to identify themselves by their religion, by that logic the so called “Sikh religion” followers ain’t Sikhs either since most of them are influenced by the stuff Hindus do, even your names are either Hindu names or in a few cases names used by Muslims.
Also it’s funny to see Sikhs try to monopolise Punjabi culture and identity while other Sikhs call Rakhri and Lohri Bipran Ki Reet!!!
“Throwing flower on a couple at the fourth Lavan in the presence of Guru is not accepted in Sikhism. Brothers helping their sister during Lavan is also prohibited because the bride can walk herself unless she is disabled.
For Bridegroom, wearing Kalgi, Sehra and haars in the presence of Guru is Bipran Ki Reet.
Celebrating Hindu festival is part of Bipran Ki Reet. Hindu festivals are Lohri, Holi and Rakhi that Sikhs in Punjab celebrate.
http://www.sikhpoint.com/community/Articles/BiprankiReet.php ”
Next start disowning Basant as well, of course after doing all this start shouting “Sacha Punjabi”!!
If Muslims and Sikhs start questioning Punjabi identity of others then I got a retort too:
“sikha rakhri nu bipran de reet kamounda, phir apna ap nu saacha punjabi kinda, mussalmano basant nu kaffira de reet kinda, eih kidda de punjabi bhaana?”
Go listen to akash radio where you can hear many Sikhs calling in and speaking in some hybrid mix of Punjabi and English, is that what you call Punjabi?
May 18th, 2007 at 11:48 pm
By the way it was a Hindu Damodar Das that first narrated Heer and Ranjha, later on Warris Shah’s variation of the story became the most popular.
Here is something for your info:
“By skillful gerrymandering, Tara Singh worked out a scheme for a Punjabi-speaking state of 35,458 square miles, containing a population of 12 million, with the Sikhs in a slight minority. ‘We multiply faster than Hindus and are more virile,’ said Tara Singh. ‘In ten years we will be in an absolute majority, leaving the soft-fleshed Hindus to trail behind.’ Two months ago Tara Singh’s party, regaining its popularity, began whooping it up for Sikhistan.
http://www.sikhtimes.com/news_070455a.html ”
“Though the government leaders did not want to accept such a demand on the basis of religion, a Punjabi suba was finally carved out in 1966. This was not on a purely linguistic but also, on a religious basis.[63] After two decades of struggle by the Sikhs, the linguistic division in Punjab was made on communal lines granting the Sikhs a Sikh-majority state excluding vast Punjabi speaking territories outside. The Sikhs themselves were an active party to this political arrangement first in 1956, when a compromise on Regional Formula was reached, and subsequently in 1966, when large chunks of Punjabi speaking areas, especially Kangra, were portioned off from the newly carved state
http://www.apnaorg.com/book-chapters/language/ ”
So much for love of Punjabi, if it was truly about Punjabi then why were terms like “Sikhistan” being used by Sikh leaders like Tara Singh at that time?
“AND DELIBERATELY WRITE SAY THAT THEIR MOTHER TONGUE IS HINDI, AT LEAST WHEN IT COMES TO VOTING IN THE CENSURE RECORDS”
Really, then how come according to official statistics there are 30 million Punjabi speakers in India today which means that there are 4 mllion more people who gave their mothertongue as Punjabi while the total strength of the Sikh community worldwide is only about 26 million?
Further 40% of Punjab is not Sikh, nearly 37% are Hindus, if 37% of Punjab’s population gave their mother tongue in the census as Hindi the number of official Punjabi speakers in India would fall down drastically which is not the case at all which means that most Hindus do give out their mother tongue as Punjabi in the census.
Let’s do a little maths here, the population of Punjab officially is 24,289,296, now 37% of that number turns out to be 8987039.5, if you subtract that number from the total population of Punjab you will only be left with 15,302,257 Punjabi speakers in Punjab which is nearly half of the actual number of Punjabis in India, the Sikhs living outside Punjab I would imagine won’t exceed more than a few million, so Sikh how do you account for the rest of the Punjabi speaking population according to the census if you take Hindus out of the equation?
May 19th, 2007 at 12:20 am
There is a phenomenon today whereby attempts are being made out Sikhs as the only real Punjabis and things are being whitewashed towards that end, you see this sinister phenomenon in the claims that Veer Haqiqat Rai was a Sikh (then why did he get so angry over a comment about Durga Mata that he sacrificed his life over it while Hindu Gods and Godesses are routine objects of ridicule on many Sikh forums these days), that Bhagat Singh became a Sikh at the last minute (which has no real evidence, Bhagat Singh was a committed Communist and even wrote an essay on why he didn’t believe in God), attempts to portray Brahmins as betrayers of Sikhs in the death of Guru Govind Singh’s younger sons without mentioning Seth Todar Mall who went bankrupt to get back their bodies.
Attempts to portray Lal Singh and Tej Singh the turncoats in the Anglo-Sikh wars as Brahmins even though they were baptised Khalsa Sikhs (of course if Hindus suggest that Banda was a Hindu also by the same token since he lived most of his life as a Hindu then that’s a big Hindu conspiracy) while not mentioning people like Diwan Mul Raj who fought as much as he could to keep Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s kingdom from falling to the British.
“The example of Madanlal Dhingra also demonstrates another sinister phenomenon. This is the negationism of Hindus in Punjabi history carried out by a section of Sikhs. To illustrate, a famous Punjabi anthem, which invoked the names of many Punjabi heroes, of modern times including Madanlal Dhingra and Lal Lajput Rai (who were Hindus) was given a new incarnation by Malkit Singh, which was very nice to listen to, but for “some reason” had the names of the Hindus removed. This example is a part of a wider phenomenon of negationism with an agenda of claiming that all worthwhile Punjabi history was due to the Sikhs.
http://groups.msn.com/SikhMyths/general.msnw?action=get_message&mview=0&ID_Message=22&LastModified=4675420488464748935 “
October 19th, 2007 at 4:29 pm
PLEASE, read into “punjabi Suba” movenment, “Maha Punjab”. “Singh Sabha movemnet” “Arya Samaj Movement” Punjab as a geograpically region in the Republic of India exists currently covering Punjab state, himachal Pardesh, Haryana and Delhi west of Yamna river. see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Punjab_region
Further communal politics after 1947, between Arya Samaj, Singh Sabha Akali Dal, Congress played on under the guise of “Linguistic states” . Some pushed for “Maha Punjab” others “Punjabi Suba”. Eventually the second partion of punjab was achieved. Its never really noticed much in popular history because there was no genocide or ethinic cleansing at the time, for the partition happened with the Indian union. Plus the excuse was “Language” not “Religion”. However the aftermath proved otherwise. Issues over the waters of punjab still continue, ie. SYL canal, and o course that played a great part in the Khalistani agitations in the 70’s 80’s and even till today. plus chandigarh is fought over. In the end it appears “hindu” harayana and Himachal Pardesh are at logger heads with “Sikh” Punjab.
This has placed many “hindus” coming from the present punjabi suba state calling themselves “HP” or “hindu-punjabi”. In reality this is kinda of taking the legitimacy of them calling themselves punjabi, because punjabi is no seen as “sikh”.
Statistally the whole punjab region (pak and ind) is muslim majority, followed by hindu then sikh. Before partition the ruling party in punjab “Punjab Unionist Party” had major hindu and sikh players like Chhotu Ram. The prime minsters were muslim. anyways it all ended eventually congress pushed in and muslim league then we end up with today.
October 20th, 2007 at 10:21 am
DISTORTIONS OF SIKH HISTORY -THE WHOLE STORY
Todays Sikhism has been built on a foundation of lies, deceit by political crooks. The following is the full story.
The British Raj left a legacy in Punjab, the cancerous Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhia Sikhism that today eats away at the intellect and character of humanity. Akali Nihang Singhs term this form of Sikhism as ‘Angrez Sikhi’ (European Sikhism) or ‘Malesh Sikhi’ (Sikhism of the filthy foreigner). This ‘Angrez Sikhi’ is currently squealing under the heavy boot of the revitalized Sanatan Sikhism.
Sanatan Sikhism, with all its glorious traditions such as ‘Shastar Vidiya’, ‘Ayurveda’, ‘Gurmat Sangeet’, ‘Arth Vidiya’, etc. was displaced by the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhias during the course of the late 19th century and early 20th century.
After over a century, Sanatan Sikhism is now making a spirited return to its former prosperity. The truth is that Sanatan Sikhism cannot be held back by terrorist threats, false accusations, slander or false propaganda
Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhia Distortions of History
Once this foundation of deception was built by the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhia progeny, such as the Shromani Gurdwara Parbandak Committee (S.G.P.C.), Panch Khalsa Diwan, Akhand Kirtani Jatha (A.K.J.), etc. modern Sikhs built their houses of falsehood upon it. These prophets of doom, nurtured on narrow-minded puritanical Victorian ideals established by the British Raj, began to label Guru-ordained Sanatan Sikhism as being false.
As the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhia movement emerged from the womb of the ‘Malesh’ (filthy foreigner) in 1879, it began to radically alter Sikhism as it existed so as ensure it conformed to their new British Raj-accommodating perception.
In fact, one of the leading figures of this movement was an Irishman, Max Arthur Macauliffe. He is regarded today by many modern Sikhs as being a great scholar and historian.
n 1882, Macauliffe achieved the position of Deputy Commissioner in Punjab. With the help of Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha, Macauliffe wrote the popular Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhia-sanctioned text that outlined Sikh history according to the views of the Tat Khalsa scholars of the time. In it, he states the reasons for writing his extensive work on the Sikhs:
‘It is admitted that a knowledge of the religions of the people of India is a desideratum for the British officials who administer its affairs and indirectly for the people who are governed by them so that mutual sympathy may be produced. It seems, at any rate politic to place before the Sikh soldiery their Guru’s prophecies in favor of the English and the texts of their sacred writings which foster their loyalty.’
‘The Sikh Religion’,1909, M.A. Macauliffe, Preface xxii
From the above quote, it is clear that one of the main objectives for Macauliffe was to inculcate loyalty within Sikhs for the British Raj. At the time, the Sanatan Sikh Raj had been displaced by the British Raj, and as such, Sanatan Sikhs, especially the Akali Nihangs, were naturally very hostile towards the British.
The British Raj utilized the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhia Sikhs to apply their ‘divide and rule’ policy sought to negate Sanatan Sikhism in the name of ‘reform’
October 20th, 2007 at 10:23 am
During the late 19th century and early 20th century, scholars such as Bhai Vir Singh came across numerous practices within Sanatan Sikhism such as ‘Chandi’ (Durga) worship, use of intoxicants such as ‘Chatka’, polygamy, and references to topics such as homosexuality, lesbianism, ‘napumsak’ (the third gender), etc. Considering such issues as being products of either ‘Hindu’ influence, ‘impure’ thoughts, or ‘manmat’ (practices that go against the teachings of the Sikh Gurus), the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhia-sponsored scholars began to dismiss, or expunge, or destroy, or alter any text/manuscript that mentioned such subjects.
In the early 20th century, the surreptitious Bhai Vir Singh decided to publish Rattan Singh Bhangu’s ‘Pracheen Panth Prakash’. He systematically expunged this great text and altered some portions of the original text, but still deviously presented it as an ‘edited’ version.
He sought to remove all mention of ‘Chandi Pooja’ and intoxicants from it for such practices, were deemed as being too ‘Hindu’ for the insecure Tat Khalsa Singhs.
The former S.G.P.C.-elected Jathedar of the Akal Takht, Giani Kirpal Singh and editor of ‘Naveen Panth Prakash’ commented on the advice given him by some modern Sikhs:
‘When I was just transliterating the invocatory verses, then many Sikh gentlemen advised me to:
‘
Erase those portions of it, which were against Guru’s thinking and Sikh history and in their place insert your own new verses. Like how, from Rattan Singh Bhangu’s work, ‘Panth Prakash’, Bhai Vir Singh removed some portions. In some places [Bhai Vir Singh] changed the wording such as that with regards to the invocation of ‘Chandi’ (Durga) (NB. Chandi Pooja was carried out by Akali Nihang Guru Gobind Singh before the before creation of the Khalsa), etc., and, replacing the word ‘Sura’ (alcohol) with ‘Suda’ (Ambrosia/Khalsa initiation)’
I did not agree with those gentlemen’s above-said thinking, and I said that to cut out some writers original text and insert in new text of your own is a great injustice with the author and in the literary world is considered a great sin. Yes, regards the text the editor in foot notes can give his own views.
‘Siri Guru Panth Prakash’, editor Giani Kirpal Singh, 1970, Vol.1, Pa.3
October 20th, 2007 at 10:26 am
The corruption of Rattan Singh’s ‘Pracheen Panth Prakash’ was not the only heinous literary crime committed by Bhai Vir Singh. The champion scholar of the Tat Khalsa also violated Kavi Santokh Singh’s great work, ‘Siri Gur Partap Suraj Granth’ (also known as ‘Suraj Prakash’/’Suraj Granth’) in a similar manner. Swami Harnam Das Udhasi, a one time Budha Dal Akali Nihang named Nurang Singh, and a great scholar of Sikh scriptures, wrote in his Budha Dal-published transliteration of Sarbloh Guru Durbar:
‘The invocatory discourse from Suraj Prakash were started by having invocatory verses in the beginning of texts pertaining to praise of Chandi (Durga) they were broken up and altered. In writing against Chandi Pooja, Doctor Vir Singh etc., in place of the original invocatory verses found in Suraj Prakash, replaced them with self-manufactured invocatory verses. In this way Kavi Santokh Singh’s true intentions were damaged. In fact, in places it was written even against Bhai Santokh Singh’s original text. For example the first ‘Dohra’ (stanza) of Siri Nanak Prakash.’
‘Siri Sarbloh Granth Sahib Stik’, published by Akali Nihang Baba Santa Singh, Volume 1, Pa.185
In 1894, Bhai Vir Singh had formed the Khalsa Tract Society in Amritsar along with Charan Singh (his father), Vjir Singh (his elder brother), Sirdar Trilochan Singh and Sirdar Surjan Singh. Along with his newspaper, the ‘Khalsa Samachaar’, the aim of the Khalsa Tract Society was to promote the ideals of the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhias and remove the influence of Sanatan Sikhism. Bhai Vir Singh would later participate in campaigns for the extremist Panth Khalsa Diwan, the Sikh Educational Society, and the Punjab and Sindh Bank.
A far more nefarious deed was to follow the desecration of Rattan Singh Bhangu’s and Kavi Santokh Singh’s works by the lumpenproletariats of the Khalsa Tract Society. Bhai Vir Singh and his associates stole the works of the great Sanatan Sikh scholar, poet, and historian, Giani Gian Singh Nirmala.
Bhai Vir Singh, accompanied by his associates visited Giani Gian Singh who was very ill, and on his deathbed. They managed to persuade the delirious and elderly Giani Ji to sign over his life’s entire unpublished works to the society.
Ironically, Giani Gian Singh miraculously began to recover. However, he had lost his entire life’s work to the devious Bhai Vir Singh. After pledging to publish Giani Gian Singh’s works, the Khalsa Tract Society failed to do so, nor did they give him his lifetime pension, which had been promised to him.
October 20th, 2007 at 10:36 am
Giani Gian Singh summed up Bhai Vir Singh and his associates of the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhias thus:
‘Their name is ‘Singh’ but they are thieves at heart. They deceive, feigning sweet intentions. Taking up the banner of Panth’s service. They steal from your pockets. They exclaim aloud of doing ‘Panthik Seva’. This way, deceiving the people they eat. Then, I explained to my mind - Oh mind you have been greatly deceived by them…Then I became greatly disheartened, I stopped singing glory of the Panth. I indulged myself in but ‘Sas Abhias’ (meditation on God). My mind I fixed on God.’
Conclusion
What these Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhia-nurtured institutions such as the S.G.P.C., A.K.J., etc. do not appreciate is that history refers to events that have occurred in the past, be they good, bad, or unacceptable. History is not what one wanted, or wished to have happened. Thus, the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhias, and the S.G.P.C. after them, by forsaking the truth have re-written, and re-orientated Sikh history to suit their perception of Sikhism itself.
The vast majority of modern-day Sikh scholars, having imbibed the norms of the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhias from early childhood and without being conscious of where and under which circumstances these norms originated, have carried on the Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhia programs. This has resulted in most Sikhs having a distorted picture of Sikh history and Sikhism. For the sake of their own personal development, they should further investigate the fact that they themselves are victims of Tat Khalsa Singh Sabhia ideological fraud
.
October 25th, 2007 at 11:29 pm
for the record the guy who came in with the name SIKH isn’t me, i think its a good article, and to me punjabi hindus and punjabi sikhs are the same with the same language grew up in the same culture same ethnic group everything is the same only difference they have is that we follow two different religions otherwise everything else is the same, as for punjab breaking up, that blame goes to akalis because they always worried if punjab stayed hindu majority they would never get voted in and rule so they pushed for a sikh majority state which pushed many hindus to choose hindi as their main language and pushed for the break up of punjab into himichal pradesh and haryana but many hindus are just as much to blame for pushing hindi as a mother toungh on the hindus of punjab. For me end of the day sikhs and hindus from the punjab have spent hundreds of years growing up with eachother and so on and are alike only thing they are different in is religion.
December 24th, 2007 at 11:34 pm
Well, I think the reason why HP’s aren’t seen as Punjabi is many of them have a preference for speaking Hindi…. ie. most of the HP’s in Canada speak Hindi at home and their kids generally don’t know Punjabi very well unless they grew up in Punjab.
Also, most HP’s aren’t proud of their Punjabi roots like Sikhs. I would Pak Punjabi Muslims are guilty of them same. HP’s voted Hindi as their mother tongue in 1966, hence the creation of Haryana and Himachal Pradesh. In Pakistan, Muslims view punjabi as a rough language.
Anyway, that’s my two cents. If someone is HP and they speak Punjabi, then they are a HP. If they choose to speak Hindi, than I don’t consider them Punjabi…
December 27th, 2007 at 8:53 am
Hi, I’m a non-Indian Hindu…100% Hindu and 100% Indonesian…
I’m Indonesian and I’m proud !
Jayalah Negeriku ! Jayalah Tanah Airku ! Jayalah Bangsaku !
Hidup Indonesia !…
December 27th, 2007 at 11:50 am
A lot of people ( both white British and British Hindus) think Kashmiri means only Muslim, Bengali means only Muslims, Gujarati means only Hindus, Punjabi means only Sikhs. They should know better.
I have heard few years ago one Cambridge lecturer( now he is a Professor in Oxford) saying with great pride, ” We in Britain recognize perhaps only one university from India”
I have asked, which one is that.
He replied ” Perhaps Karachi”.
I said, ” But Karachi is in Pakistan”
He replied, ” You always change things too much”.
Ignorance is Bliss.
December 27th, 2007 at 8:47 pm
wow how come there are so many posts already! I feel it is easy to understand the whole HP concept, having said this I guess other Indians feel insecure as the gujji’s made up bulk of Indians in britain, am I right?
December 27th, 2007 at 10:54 pm
Yep, here’s a typical gujarati, Mr Patel !! I for one have spread the words Hindu Gujarati across many of my community members. Unfortunately many 1st genenration gujus are stuck in their ideology of being in East Africa or Western India. In the UK we need to have our religous ID at the forefront. Many Asians I have noticed always say Sikh, muslim , Gujaratis, its the 1st generations fault for not teaching and being proud of calling ourselves Hindus! A lot of my generation are only interested in materialistic objects and do not have the aptitude to learn about their true history and religion. And what I have found is that those who shout the loudest and are boystrous get heard and are believed even though they maybe false. So its time we al called ourselves Hindus!
Especially many of my ignorant Gujarati bros & sisters.
I have even been labelled as too religous, by certain community eleders, who havent got a clue, because I call myself Hindu.
December 27th, 2007 at 11:47 pm
The debate started by the Hindu Punjabis being Hindus and not Sikhs. It is very commonly beleived (wrongly) by Gujaratis from East African connections that HPs are sikhs, because Hps always identified themselves with Gurdwaras in Africa and not Hindu Temple as a rule, although they would vist hindu temple on ocassions and were very welcome. This was because most of the services and temples had committee members who were predominantly Gujarati’s and all the conversations and services were in Gujarati. Even Sindhi’s who came from Pakinstani Punjab origins, would on regular bases pray at Gurudwaras because the services were performed in Punjabi and they (HPs and Sindhis) would prefer to be associated with Gurudwaras.
Although the first generation Gujaratis that migrated to Africa would know the difference, the later generations did not understand this. I had sindhi and Sikh friends in East Africa who spoke read & wrote Gujarati, because the schools were predominantly run by Gujaratis and the East African Sikhs and Punjabis and Sindhis all spoke and understood Gujarati.
Until late sixties when the educational needs of Asians sent their children to India( and I was one of them) we did not distinguish between HPs and Sikhs. Call this ignorance or the macho image that HPs wanted to transmit, it was very much insignificant because we all lived in perfect harmony as “Muhindis” (Swahili for Indian of subcontinent), as that unity was needed. Until the 1965 war, we did not know the difference between Indian and Pakistani origin, and we did not care hoot about it, because we had no differences between us.
I was “corrupted” by the knowledge or enlightening, by the difference between HP and Sikh when I realised the effect of the Khalistan movement and I tried to understand the difference and was sadder for the knowledge I bargained for and obtained, in return for the blissful ignorance that I was living with.
I am Indian Origin first, Hindu second and Gujarati third. Please lets not divide ourselves.
Today I have come to live with the bitter fact that Benazir Bhutto has been assasinated and even as an Indian, I shed a tear or two, when I saw a clip of her interview saying that, “Even if we have to die, I want to try and give my Country what it deserves and Democracy is the Goal.” It is sad sad world and as an Indian I feel that a cousin has been killed and wasted, who was some hope for the subcontinent’s chance of peaceful progress to stabilty and prosperity and civilisation of some value……
December 28th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
No other religions come togheter than Hinduism and Buddhism in east india and mountain areas of india and Nepal you will find mixed temples side by side of Hindus and Buddhists…The Hindu and Buddhist monks wear the same saffron or yellow robes and sit togheter and pray…The Buddha symbols and Krishna are found placed togheter as for both Hindus and Buddhists start with Aum in their prayers…Swastika and Karma circle which is originally from Hinduism is found on many Buddhist temples..Lord Buddha is also found in many Hindu temples…Hindu and Buddhists both agree that after death it is Nirvana attained and both serve Dharma…Sikhism is a mixture of islam and Hinduism sikhism is a monetheistic religion as they claim even they do not have Moses abraham who were founders of monetheism…There is a discussion among Sikhs with Hindus and muslims about who was the real founder of sikhism?
Muslims claims that Guru nanak never said anything about sikhism rather he converted to islam and went to mecca for hajj and Hindus claims that Guru gobind singh made sikhism as for many muslims who accept the same…With monetheistic aggression many Hindus had to change their way of thinking as for Buddhists who never saw the sunlight in India and were killed or driwen away because of arabs and mughals…
December 28th, 2007 at 4:34 pm
My father was a punjabi pandit while my mother came from a mongol descendant nepali hindu family…Me as child had intrests in looking at punjabi culture and learn from the place my father came from..Punjabi culture involve very much meat and alcoholism which made me look away from punjabi way of life…Today in marriages in punjab maybe other places in india if meat and alcohol is not served then the wedding does not count as wedding or other parties..In my mothers lineage alcohol was strictly forbidden because of respect to monks and society..Mongols who were Buddhists and Hindus was quite more soft than the animists who were more into aggression and consumed alcohol as the part of recive their aggressive mentality..Mongolian Buddhists and Hindus were more into spirituality…
December 28th, 2007 at 10:23 pm
Genghis Khan what the hell is Mongols?
Nepalis are NOT Mongols.
Next I don’t know where you got the idea that meat eating was not done by Hindus because they were supposedly soft, well the Gurkhas are staunch Hindus and they do eat meat from what I know and are definitely not considered soft.
December 29th, 2007 at 1:31 am
Kadimipuli Porumannana, Genghis Khan is Nepalese so I’m sure he’d know more than you. But maybe Tibetan would be a be more suitable than Mongol? But then again Tibetan could be classed as Mongoloid …
December 29th, 2007 at 3:21 pm
The fact that you happen to be born into some community does not necessarily mean that you know more about the community than outsiders (although often it does), a white convert Hindu would probably know more about Dharma than many of the kool yaar by name Hindus from Bharat.
Nepal is a country that is mixed, many have mongloid features (that is not the same as saying they are Mongols) but many don’t (like the Madhesis in Terai).
December 29th, 2007 at 4:39 pm
Most of nepalis are descendants from Mongols as for tibetans some of them also come orignally from mongolia..Lama buddhism is also popular in mongolia….When Mongols won china they stelled many different places and made tribes there…Still many mongols continued eastwards toward persia arabia even in europe you will find many mongol descendants…
Mongols in christimas eve attacked wienna with Ogodei khan son of genghis khan as their new leader who later died of injuries and mongols had to pull back to elect new leader thats why europe is the only place which was spared exept russia where mongol descendant Batu khan made the golden horde…In muslim world Timur was the only mongol descentant who converted to islam…While mughals were sons of womens who were raped by mongolian armies in afghanistan…..
So mongols descendants are found in much parts f asia even Nepal were later Indian people came along with the first Hindu king prithvi narayan shahdev…
December 29th, 2007 at 4:41 pm
So dear kadimipuli Nepalis who are far eastern look do have their roots from mongolia at least 60-70% of them..Which includes me from my mothers side while from my father i belong originally kashmir pandits who later came to punjab and stayed many generations till today..
January 6th, 2008 at 5:18 pm
The Gujarati view of HP, that you describe, is that of those Gujaratis who have never been to India. They are ignorant about Gujarat itself, so forget about any appreciable understanding of the rest of India.
January 8th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
i am a Hindu. A Gujarati. I have come across those ignorant types who concieve HP’s as a hindu-sikh mix. but in my experience those people have actually always been sikhs.
my ex girlfriend who was a sikh, was totally unable to grasp the concept that a punjabi could be anything other than sikh. and the same goes for my sikh friends from uni- even they have this misconception that HP’s are some sort of converts from sikh to hindu or such….
I as a gujarati have to end up explaining to them what an HP is. That an HP is the same as me only from a different state/culture.
I don’t even like the term HP but i do see whey they feel the need to call themselves that, due to the types of people i described above.
my name has ‘dev’ on the end of it…this leads many sikhs to the assumption that im sikh as well. how stupid is that….like dev is a sikh copyright!!
I also find it hard to believe that when discussing origins, people refer to muslims, sikhs and gujaratis as if we are a religion!!! Gujarat is a state- get that through your thick heads!!!!
And i also don’t agree with the typical view that bhangra music for example, is a sikh based tradition. its a punjabi tradtion…therefore belongs equally to hindu’s and sikh’s. even non punjabi hindu’s think its a sikh thing.
i wait for the day when people realise this.
also one more thing…i read a comment above by a girl who stated that if a punjabi person doesn’t speak punjabi, but hindi instead then she doesn’t consider those kind of people true punabi. what a dumb girl.
go to mumbai and you’ll find thousands…millions even, of punjabi’s who speak hindi. or gujarati’s who speak hindi.
that was one of the stupidest things i’ve ever heard.
February 27th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
Dipak Vithlani, I appreciated most of your post until you shed tears for Benazir Bhutto. On a human level, she lost her life, which is something to mourn. Beyond that, give me a break. Under her regime, the Kashmir dispute actualy became worse and she emboldened the ISI to spread their cancer in India.
As for the Sikhs, remember one thing, their guru said they should be “warrior saints” and their mission was to fight Aurungzeb (probably misspelled). They were actually supposed to protect Hindu’s. The guru’s also predicted a time when these warrior saints would lose their way and forget their ideals and duties, and run astray. Unfortunately it came true and they turned on their Hindu brethren in Punjab. I won’t say more.
As for being Punjabi, you are Punjabi because you believe that you are. India is a huge conglomeration of a massive group of diverse people with different languages, it’s a political creation. Being punjabi means you love the language, the family values, and the food. It’s a lot more, but start with the basics. The Punjabi’s who look down on others who speak Hindi, that’s massive retardation. We can’t change the past, let’s change the future. If someone says they are Punjabi, and feel they are Punjabi, at least acknowledge that. Now, if they don’t speak it properly, well that’s ok, if you do know the dialect better, teach them, don’t put them down!!
May 9th, 2008 at 11:36 am
Hell yes, I’m Hindu!
Hell yes, I’m Punjabi!
Hell yes, I’m 6ft tall drop dead gorgeous guy!
Hun dassoo?