JK Rowling’s Controversial New Book, “Casual Vacancy,” Has Sikhs in Uproar Because of a Lack of Exoticism, Sections on Naan-Bread Are Limited, and The Aroma of Curry is Not Even Mentioned. Akal Takht and the SGPC Are Now Involved. Dates For the Book Burning to Be Announced Via Twitter.
The burning question on everyone’s minds: Is JK Rowling an RSS agent? has finally been answered. Her latest novel, Casual Vacancy features a Sikh family, typical of RSS fiction, who are central to the plot of this novel, and are depicted as the source of morality in this otherwise very dark tale. To promote her anti-Sikh agenda, she integrates Sikh theology and history throughout the narrative, evoking figures like Bhai Kanhaia, Guru Nanak Dev Ji, and refuses to ingrejify or shorten any of the Sikh characters’ names. Sukhvinder does not become Sook; Jaswinder does not become Jazz. But before someone updates their FaceBook status to, JK Rowling is an RSS agent, a few minor details:
In case you don’t know what I’m on about, let me bring you up-to-date:
JK Rowling’s Casual Vacancy came out on Thursday and was initially being lauded by Indian and Sikh media outlets for having a Sikh family at the heart of the novel. But then speed-readers at the Akal Takht and the SGPC zipped through the 600 pager, and by Friday, the President of the SGPC, Avtar Singh Makkar had not only read it and been offended by exactly one line on page 120, but in the spirit of Sikhism, demanded that the one line he found offensive be removed and censored by India’s curiously named “Information and Broadcasting Ministry” run by Sonia Gandhi. Orwell anyone? This is the same censorship board that just banned distribution of Salman Rushdie’s film, Midnight’s Children, because it painted Indira Gandhi in a negative light and invoked India’s anti-defamation law when the Washington Post wrote an article calling Manmohan Singh hopelessly ineffectual. The World’s Largest Democracy is currently in the midst of trying to ban internet sites and FaceBook fan pages with blasphemous names like I hate Sonia Gandhi (I just liked all 8 fan pages, even the misspelled ones).
In JK Rowling’s case, not only should the one line be censored, but she has to come to the Akal Takht and apologize for slandering Sikhs. So just what is this line that has all of us Sikhs bristling?
President of the SGPC, Avtar Singh Makkar
According to avid reader, Avtar Singh Makkar of the SGPC, it is on page 120 when the character Fats describes his classmate Sukhvinder as “mustachioed, yet large-mammaried, scientists remain baffled by the contradictions of the hairy man-woman.” He claims that Rowling’s choice of words are “a slur on the Sikh community and provocative.” Then he said that the author must apologize or remove the text from her book in India or face action. Out of curiousity though, if she apologizes, does she still have to remove the line?
I was much slower at reading the novel, but found it interesting that Makkar didn’t find anything else in this novel offensive or condemnable. Not the fact that a Sikh girl is at a party where she drinks vodka. That there is a rape scene in the novel (not involving any of the Sikh characters), a tremendous amount of swearing, sex, and drug use.
With few notable exceptions, one of the things that I find tiresome in stories, featuring ethnic characters is that I don’t see them as human, compared to their white counterparts. They are often stereotypes or token characters whose ethnicity has to either be explained or ignored. When I teach creative writing, regardless of the cultural or ethnic background of my students, most of them initially create worlds in which only white or race-neutral characters like Steve, Janet, and Cynthia live. And the reason is one I completely understand: You don’t have to explain Steve, Janet, or Cyndi, but people feel the need to either explain Mohammad, Tyrone, or Pushpinder, or completely ignore their cultural/religious roots, so they can get on with the story.
When we think of quaint English towns, we don’t think of anyone “ethnic” living there because that’s not what we see depicted in the stories we watch or read. Even metropolitan cities like London and New York often have characters that are all white (Bridget Jones’ Diary is just one example). Just last year, in March, the creator of the English village drama Midsomer Murders admitted to his hand in maintaining the fantasy of the whites only English towns.
“We just don’t have ethnic minorities involved,” said Brian May. “Because it wouldn’t be the English village with them. It just wouldn’t work. We’re the last bastion of Englishness and I want to keep it that way.”
And Hollywood isn’t any better, even with Harold and Kumar (the former is a first name and the latter is a last name by the way. Just wanted to point that out).
I came late to the whole Harry Potter party, but one of the things I really liked about JK Rowling’s style of writing is that it is smart and racially informed. She has a very multicultural student body at Hogwarts in the novels, which are rendered into a quick pan-shot in the Hollywood film versions, and in the Half-Blood Prince, she makes clear racial parallels to racial purity, with terms like “half-muggle.”
Her latest novel, Casual Vacancy is a complete and utter departure from her Harry Potter series. There is zero magic and it is a bit silly to compare the two, yet most of the reviews have done just that. It is incredibly dark and gritty, with many adult themes. It is definitely not a Sikh themed story either, but I find it admirable that she decided to use a Sikh family, not just as tokens in this story, but as very human characters that I thought were very well developed.
In recent years, we’ve heard quite a bit about bullying of Sikh boys in schools, but nothing really about baptized Sikh women with facial hair, who I think get it much worse, not just from outside the Sikh community, but within their own community as well. At Sidak, I took an intense and highly recommended Gurmukhi 101 workshop, where I met a young Amritdhari couple. The wife had facial hair and I was very impressed at how comfortable she felt in her own skin, as well as how accepting she was of other beliefs. But she would not make a good protagonist to the bully character of Fats in JK Rowling’s story. Neither would Balpreet Kaur, who someone attempted to humiliate by posting an image of her with her facial hair online, which she responded to with humour and absolute grace, and amazingly, even behind the online cloak of anonymity she inspired an apology from the original poster. It’s a lovely ending, but for a fictional story to work, there has to be conflict, which can’t be resolved too easily, and a delicate unfolding of the emotional drama.
JK Rowling’s story is incredibly dark, and this character, who lives in an all white English town has understated power and slow, but steady self-confidence that develops. Sukhvinder, the daughter in an overachieving family, has dyslexia that her mother thinks is just laziness. At school, she is viciously bullied with constant taunts about her facial hair from other students, but mainly instigated from the character Fats, whose real name is Stuart. The one line Makkar found offensive is part of a much longer verbal assault that to me felt very real. But the point that is being missed here is that Fats is shown to be an incredibly mean spirited bully. If his language was watered down, he would probably be more likable, and that’s the opposite effect that Rowling is going for. It’s like setting a novel on a slave plantation and not having a white character use the word “nigger,” because it will offend someone today, or writing a novel with a Sikh male character, and not being able to have them speak or act as individuals, but as symbols of an entire community.
The line Makkar found offensive is by no means tame, but there are many other passages that are much more offensive, such as:
Andrew’s best friend Fats referred to her (Sukhvinder) as TNT, short for Tits ‘N Tash (mustache). (20)
Right after the line where Fats calls her a hairy man woman, the narrator describes the tension and uneasiness of Andrew’s loyalty, to make sure that the reader views Fats as the loudmouth, bully, and ringleader, who nobody else fully supports:
Andrew sniggered, yet he was not entirely at his ease. He would have enjoyed himself more if he knew that Sukhvinder could not hear what Fats was saying. It was sort of funny but it made Andrew uncomfortable. Andrew laughed, then felt guilty (121). At the end of the scene, Sukhvinder is crying and has nobody she can confide in, as she sinks back into obscurity.
And in a later chapter, the narrator allows us to see Sukhvinder’s reaction:
Sukhvinder lay on her back on top of her covers and wished with all of her being that she was dead. If she could have achieved suicide, simply by willing it, she would have done it without hesitation. Her self disgust was like a nettle suit; every part of her prickled and burned with it. (145)
Her mother, Parminder, deals with the grief and shock of her friend’s death:
Her hands were still pressed tightly over her mouth. She stared at the grave, sweet visage of Guru Nanak pinned to the corkboard.
And references to Gurbani are also used on page 144:
There was a terrible weight on Parminder’s chest, but did not the Guru Granth Sahib exhort friends and relatives of the dead not to show grief, but to celebrate their loved one’s reunion with God? Parminder silently intoned the nighttime prayer, the kirtan sohila.
And when she questions why she is fighting for an addiction center to be built in town, the narrator makes a casual reference to Bhai Kanhaiya,
Who could not see a difference between the souls of allies and enemies. (369)
I am not saying that this novel is the most brilliant novel in the history of novels, or even that this is a novel everyone will enjoy just because it has Sikh characters in it. It is a dramatized, grim reality, with very adult themes, and adult language. But a genuine effort has been made by Rowling to integrate Sikh values into several characters in this novel, so I don’t think we should start our morchas and book burnings just yet. Nor should we be supporting censorship just because we don’t like what a character Rowling created, has said. We don’t get to dictate what she can and cannot write.
A few years ago, she outed Dumbledore, one of her characters in the Harry Potter series, by saying that she had always thought of him as gay. And there was a huge fuss being kicked up and her response is one I hope she uses in India if this whole silly controversy doesn’t disappear on its own, “He is my character. He is what he is and I have the right to say what I want about him.”
Are there no other pressing issues the Akal Takht and the SGPC can take up relating to defamation and slander of Sikhism? The banning of turbans in France that involves more than passing out brochures? How about Punjabi musicians claiming to be Sikh, who use women in their videos as sexual props, and then come out with a religious cd in time for Vaisakhi? Or a self-procaimed young Guru, who takes money from old men and women, while he talks on his cell phone. How about we start with even one of those?
21 Responses to “JK Rowling’s Controversial New Book, “Casual Vacancy,” Has Sikhs in Uproar Because of a Lack of Exoticism, Sections on Naan-Bread Are Limited, and The Aroma of Curry is Not Even Mentioned. Akal Takht and the SGPC Are Now Involved. Dates For the Book Burning to Be Announced Via Twitter.”
Leave a Reply
Please don't burn this book. Those behind this article are forgetting the very meaning of Sikhism, and all the guru's taught us. Why so sensitive? This book is not a factual account of the life of each and every Sikh! It is simply a story. Fiction. A story which has truth in it at parts… Some 'Sikh' Boys and girls go to Parties and drink Vodka – this is the reality! Let us not do something stupid and Irrational by burning the book – just enjoy the Yarn.
Could Makkar and his ilk have other motivations? Possibly! The timing suggests to depoliticize and shift attention from the very real jailing of Sikh activists – SGPC-member Kulbir Singh Barapind and Daljit Singh Bittu and the reprimand by Human Rights Watch about the ongoing torture in Punjab – http://www.hrw.org/news/2012/09/27/india-punjab-c…
While he decries Rowling, Makkar has been completely silent on this issue!
So instead of a SGPC that takes on any number of the issues that you suggest, though casteism and sexism seem much more important to me, we have an SGPC President (a Badal appointee) whose sole job is to produce meaningless press statements and give voice to our version of Manufactured Outrage Inc. Now along with our never-ending list of calls to ban/censor Hindi movies, we can add Rowling’s book along with Badal Government’s arrest of 2 Punjabi publishers and editors for reprinting books by Malwa’s beloved – Babu Rajab Ali (1894-1979) of all things – using language and then-used caste names that is now deemed objectionable! (on arrest – http://www.hardnewsmedia.com/2012/09/5646; on Babu Rajab Ali – http://www.apnaorg.com/poetry/rajabali/Babu_Rajab…
But as Baba Badal and Badal Jr. have little to offer the people of Punjab as a whole (beyond their “clients” that form their patronage network), they provide us never-ending “outrage.” All the while trampling rule of law (ex. Barapind/Bittu detentions), providing little potential for economic growth and in fact watching its flight http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/news/article3…
and despite Blighty Singh’s well-intentioned misgivings – Punjab has a drug epidemic on its hands and truth-be-told partly because of its hands http://www.brecorder.com/articles-a-letters/187/1…
We need new blood in the SGPC and an electorate free from Badal’s patronage links. Barapind’s victory as a member shows an opening, though VERY difficult, is possible and it is there that Sikhs in Punjab should concentrate their efforts (his detention on Badal’s orders shows that victory will not be easy and the old-guard will attempt to destroy even the sprouts of opposition). We should question all of the pre-occupations of the SGPC in this “outrage machine” rather than merely trying to push it from Rowling to Diljit.
Instead of doing parchaar of Sikhi and create a radical vision that checks Babas/plutocrats, just as the Lahore Singh Sabha did, we have an SGPC of the Amritsar Singh Sabha ruling the roost.
In the meantime, the plutocrats and cronies will continue with their “manufactured outrage,” since with so much artificially-generated outrage, any real outrage (such as that earlier in the year in support of Rajoana) can easily be controlled, manipulated for political gain vis-a-vis the Centre, and then quickly dissipated all at Badal’s whim. Eh hai sada Punjab!
This is spot on. Thank you for posting this very insightful and accurate portrait of the current state of Sikhs admist the media and state-sponsored garble.
I've read this book, there is nothing in it negative to Sikhs..Now I am only posting this here because I don't know where else to do so…New book of mine out in Punjabi dealing with real issues for Sikhs…including 1984
Use this link to get 15% off O and other Blurb books http://www.sikhchic.com/article-detail.php?id=247…
http://www.blurb.co.uk/books/4091913-softback
http://5abi.com/breview/br2008/043-oo-roop-270213… http://www.sikhchic.com/books/roop_dhillons_new_n…
I totally second that
Seems like stuff got taken out of context and misunderstandings ensued [shrugs]
Also the last line mentioned someone who never proclaimed himself as “Guru” =|
Get your facts straight bro
Wow. Censorship here is pretty arbitrary.
That's my point @absurd – the censorship is NOT arbitrary – it is a manufactured outrage. What is censored is arbitrary.
It’s not censorship, it’s “hey that’s messed up and offensive, apologize”
Agree with both of your well articulated and supported points, Harman. It's not censorship just because they are demanding a line be removed on behalf of the entire Sikh Community. No more than a puttay hath vali chaper is not assault and just getting one's point across. You are also correct in pointing out my factually inaccuracies in the last line. This will be rectified immediately. He is just some young dude who is invited to go to Gurduaras and old men and women give him expensive gifts because they just have extra cash lying around their massive bungalows.
Interesting (and sensible) blog but it has quite a few inaccuracies in it along with the usual tirade against everything Indian (read Hindu). Of course, one cannot miss that 'holy-than-all' streak which runs throughout the otherwise lucidly written piece.
"This is the same censorship board that just banned distribution of Salman Rushdie’s film, Midnight’s Children, because it painted Indira Gandhi in a negative light and invoked India’s anti-defamation law when the Washington Post wrote an article calling Manmohan Singh hopelessly ineffectual."
Simple facts, Midnight's Children NOT Banned in India and "anti-defamation" laws were never "invoked" when the WP publish that Manmohan S article.
Even though M F Hussain died few years back, the Indian liberals still defend his right of artistic expression for painting Hindu deity Sita in nude sitting on Hanuman's tale in a painting which could not be called anything but highly provocative and blasphemous. Same liberals failed miserably to defend Taslima Nasreen when she was attacked by some Muslim fanatics in Hyderabad for exposing their counterparts’ heinous crimes against minorities (Hindus and, now, Buddhists) in Bangladesh.
But when it comes to banning the books and individuals, SGPC (and Akal Takht) are seasoned players. They would go on ranting against the ban on the turbans in France but no Sikh would bat an eyelid when whole communities are ‘banned’ by SGPC employed Akal Takht (Nirankaris, Dera Sacha Sauda, Bhaniara followers, Noormehlias, etc.).
http://punjabpanorama.blogspot.com.au/2007/06/mak…
more…
I appreciate you taking the time to read through the post and make your comments. The whole point of my piece is to bring up how silly the whole thing is, and we seem to agree on that point. But I'll address the other points you raise:
I don't see anything "anti-Hindu" about the piece, but yes it is taking a clear stance against an overly sensitive government that takes censorship too far. The SGPC is working with laws in India to attempt censorship of Rowling's novel, so that's what I am addressing, but I don't have any particular anti-India or anti-Hindu agenda in this piece.
Your "facts" are debatable and are largely based on semantics. If the film version of Midnight's Children is not allowed to be distributed in India, then it is effectively banned. And in the quote you're using, I clearly wrote "banned distribution," not the banning of the film, which is a Catch 22/ Film is allowed, but nobody is allowed to distribute it.
And Sonia Gandhi has used the anti-defamation law to argue that the Washington Post issue an apology for writing the article about what she felt was "defaming" Manmohan Singh and India. Her reaction has been written about in several news articles, as has the banning of the distribution of Rushdie's film for the reasons I mentioned.
A lot of countries have blasphemy laws that cover a range of things and nobody can decide on what constitutes blasphemy and how that balances out with freedom of speech/expression.
Hussain was charged with blasphemy by several Hindu fundamentalist groups (I don't think the charges stuck) and he had death threats against him, and left India during the last years of his life for fear of his safety. So, sure, some people may have defended his right, but the censorship law combined with gunda-raj is what prevailed in the end.
Taslima Nasreen is not exactly a counterpart of Hussain. I agree that she should have been protected the same way Rushdie was and the same way Hussain should have been, but her case falls much squarely in the realm of blasphemy by many interpretations, where saying it is "art" is not enough to get very many people on her side. Her novel Lajji (shame) attacks Islamic ideology as inherently intolerant, where a Hindu family is harassed by a bunch of crazy Muslims. And she also made statements in favor of rewriting parts of the Quran. I don't endorse any of the death threats or physical assaults, but this is not a simple artistic expression. Hussain, by contrast, was making art that angered some Hindus, but he never made statements against the religion as Taslima did.
Navdeepji, You were wrong when you said: "If the film version of Midnight's Children is not allowed to be distributed in India, then it is effectively banned". No one can stop the film from being distributed. It could be because of commercial consideration that distributors are not buying the prints.
You have managed to gloss over number of 'excesses' (attempts to suppress free speech, right to practice one's faith and right to live) radical Sikhs have committed but bent upon linking even the current, to quote Jodha, manufactured outrage with an "overly sensitive government that takes censorship too far". Unless you are privy to some inside news, no one has blamed GOI for 'non-distribution' of the film ‘Midnight's Children’ so far. You can blame my poor ‘Google-skills’ but I have not come across such a pathetic attempt to suppress, shall I say, freedom of speech.
Once again, you could be right but I have not read anything suggesting that Sonia G is trying to block this movie. After all, even the outrageously autocratic Indira did not ban the book ‘Midnight's Children’ though ‘Satanic Verses’ (by the same author, of course) was banned swiftly once few mullahs objected to its content.
I am not surprised by your support for MFH and condemnation of Taslima. Of course, the comparison between the religious sentiments of Hindus and Sikhs (or Muslims, Christians, pagans) does not make any sense. Hindus deserve to be ridiculed and their spiritual icons deserved to be mocked and shown in the worst imaginable light for some reasons. Of course, the matter would have been totally different if MFH had dared to show a Sikh women (forget someone from Gurus' families) sitting nude on a mythological beast’s tail.
The reaction over Rowling's book is a trailer of what overly sensitive Sikh leadership can do even though it is just one line about a fictional character. The SGPC chief is jumping up and down over such outrageous (!!) portrayal of Sikhs:
"a slur on the Sikh community and provocative", SGPC chief Avtar Singh Makkar said the author must apologize or remove the text from her book in India or face action.”
"Even if the author had chosen to describe the female Sikh character's physical traits, there was no need for her to use provocative language, questioning her gender. This is condemnable," said Makkar.”
A mention of facial hair of a fictional character is ‘provocative’ and painting religious icons in nude (with underlying suggestion of sexual relationship between the two – revered as mother-son duo) is “art”.
Imagine MFH “art” about a Sikh woman (once again, a non-Sikh drawing someone from Gurus’ families in nude is simply unimaginable) and there would be unsheathed swords everywhere in Punjab and, maybe, London, BC, NY, etc.
The two men (who happened to be Hindus) ‘accused’ of Granth Sahib beadbi were recently assaulted in India while one (70-80 yr old sadh) was beheaded another barely survived with his life. The fanatics who carried out these outrageous attacks have now been added to the annals of the recent Sikh soormas such as Bhindranwale, Talwinder S Parmar, Rajoana, Hawara, etc.
The recent uproar against Kuldip Nayyar's comment about some Sikh political group was another testimony of manufactured and selective rage Sikh organisations often express. Same Sikh bodies unleash their own version of apartheid, medieval diktats and then remind the world about the humanistic values SGPC brand Khalsa represents.
Such outrage over an article of faith which does not even find any support in SGGS!
Hypocrisy?
A democracy even having a system in place to control what information is allowed and what isn't defeats the point of a democracy, let alone the "world's largest." The film will be screened in 40 countries the world over, but failed to find a single distributor in India. I just find it hard to believe that Slumdog Millionaire and even Fire found its way to many cinemas in India, but apparently money is the reason not a single distributor wants to take a risk with this film. It seems there are much bigger risks involved.
In order for the film "Amu" to even be released in India, they had to remove ALL references to what is common knowledge: congress party leaders like Sajjan Kumar and Jagdish Tytler instigated mobs to massacre Sikhs in Delhi.
Here is a quote from film writer, Shubhra Gupta: "In India, we are very wary of any film that even is political, let alone politically sensitive. Any resemblance to a politician … could be a problem. In a robust democracy, all of this should be possible." The Indian government often uses underhanded tactics to ban books. Rushdie's novel, "Satanic Verses," for example, is also not technically banned. It is not allowed to be imported by the finance ministry, who have nothing to do with literature or the arts or politics. (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-19566894).
Indira Gandhi did not ban Midnight's Children because she sued Rushdie for defamation and demanded some lines be taken out in order for it to be allowed in India. He agreed to the censorship and took the lines out. After her assassination in 1984, he put those lines back in.
I'm sure the film version of Midnight's Children will be available on the black market very quickly in India and I've found Satanic Verses in many bookshops in India. But books on 1984, however, are largely banned in bookshops all over India, and I've only been able to find them here and there in Punjab. No official ban. Is it economics too?
I don't support either MFH or Taslima or that guy who put Jesus in a jar of urine and called it "Art." But free speech does not mean you can scream "fire" in a crowded movie theater and not expect people start running out. It's an understandable reaction. The reaction Taslima received was not all that unexpected either, neither was the reaction MFH received, resulting in both of them having to leave their countries for fear for their safety. The reaction to Satanic Verses was quite extreme, but not unexpected either.
The hypotheticals you're suggesting of "If MFH" created images depicting the Gurus in a way that would offend, then I'm sure he would have received threats from Sikhs, rather than from the Hindu fundamentals. The examples you've used of certain Sikhs beheading or killing those who desecrated the Guru Granth Sahib is a reaction that should also not be so shocking. If someone burned a copy of the Rig Veda or the Quran or the Bible, the reaction would be similar to what allegedly took place with the desecration of the GGS. I completely agree that manufactured rage on things that don't matter is something we should all stand up against. But if someone is going out of their way to cause offense, some backlash should be expected. In Rowling's case, she was careful to stay away from any ridicule or mocking of the actual theology of Sikhi, and the mocking she uses is for the purpose of humanizing the characters. Not offense for the sake of offense.
Navdeepji, 'Midnight Children' has found a distributor and the uncut movies would be released in December.
'Midnight’s Children' set to release in India http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2012-…
I could be wrong on this but distributors' reluctance to pick Deepa Mehta's movie could also be attributed to Muslim masses antagonism for Salman Rushdie.
part 2
When Haranvi Jats’ Khaap panchayats ‘inspired’ social boycott of few married couples (who had married intra-gotra) few years, there was a huge uproar in India. Here Akal Takht publicly announces boycott of the whole community and no one finds that revolting.
I find the following lines from one of the SGPC letters to the French President against ban on the turban, really amusing:
“…on November 25, 1981, the General Assembly of the United Nations adopted a declaration on the elimination of all forms of intolerance and of discrimination based on religion or belief and that no one shall be subject to coercion which would impair his freedom to have a religion or belief of his choice. Freedom to manifest one’s religion and belief may be subject to limitations to protect public safety order, health or morals in the rights of others”.
Wow! Such noble, lofty principles SGPC is aware of. “..no one shall be subject to coercion” bhai wah! Now I am really confused. If the SGPC (and its employees like Akal Takht jathedar) have such firm belief in humanistic values who is issuing such Talibanesque Hukamanams boycotting such large segments of Sikh/Punjabi communities as Nirankaris in 1978. To give just a glimpse of one such regressive diktat issued in 1978:
“Issued under the seal of the Akal Takht, every Sikh man and woman is hereby directed to oppose in every possible way this sect which is anti-religion and enemy of the mankind and it should not be allowed to proliferate in the society and the world at large. There should be no relation of roti and beti with those Sikhs who have joined this so-called Nirankari sect, including their head Gurbachan Singh, and there should be no interaction of any type with them” (Financial Express 18 Apr.1998).
Dera Sacha Sauda followers have become the latest in this chain of coercion by radical Sikhs lled by Akal Takht.
“Akali’s worries spring from their running animosity with the Dera, which has been at the receiving end of Sikh bodies after the sect chief allegedly imitated Guru Gobind Singh two years ago. After the controversy, the Dera followers – mostly dalits – were frequently attacked by Sikh groups, and subjected to humiliation and police action.”
“A total bandh was today observed in Jalandhar on a call given by various Sikh organisations, supported by the Shiromani Akali Dal (Badal) in protest against the Dera Sacha Sauda controversy.
All shops, except a few medical stores, other business establishments and educational institutions remained closed in the city during the bandh.
Hundreds of Sikh activists in different groups brandishing swords and other traditional weapons on two-wheelers and four-wheelers patrolled”
Excerpt from a 2010 Hindustan Times article:
The Sikh high priests in a meeting at the Akal Takht on Sunday announced that all those excommunicated from the panth (community) could return to the mainstream if they apologised at Akal Takht within a month. Akal Takht Jathedar Giani Gurbachan Singh said, “Keeping in mind the recent tricentenary celebrations in connection with Baba Banda Singh Bahadur’s Sirhind Fateh Divas, it was decided to give such a chance to all those who had been excommunicated.”
If someone still did not turn up to apologise before the Akal Takht, the Sikh community must boycott such persons, he added.
The high priests also decided that nobody was allowed to play the role of Sikh Gurus or their relatives in any film. Even the role of ‘panj pyaras’ in any movie will be played by the ‘panj pyaras’ approved by the panth.
“…nobody was allowed” by whom? By the Sikh clergy of course, who else? The sole spiritual, judicial, censor body Sikhs (and their subjects, other Punjabis) would need.
The Sikh priests have not only talked about boycotting (!!) people but have also announced rewards for beheading:
“During the Dera-Sikh clashes last year, Jathedar Nandgarh shot into fame with his announcement that any person who beheads Dera chief would be weighed with gold. Later, he is believed to have become silent under the state government’s pressure.”
Nandgarh also questioned why Dera chief was living like a free man.
“And when the Dera chief knows that Sikhs all across the globe are against him, why did he go to a shopping mall then? He should have maintained a low profile there. Some of the central government agencies are behind all this and Dera chief is their man.”
Makes sense, if Sikhs do not like you for whatever reasons, you cease to have any rights.
More on such issues here: http://punjabpanorama.blogspot.com.au/2007/06/mak…
What a waste- Sikhs need to spend their time focusing on the last 30 years of human rights abuses in India. This is a minor story that some are decideing to make a big issue out.
Look at all your brothers and sisters that were butchered- spend your energy helping their families.
I agree with joe….. There is no issue here ..we must focus on rights of the people…. Also I think we need to be concerned about the amount of Sikhs cutting their hair who are not taught Sikh ideals early in life…. Like for instance Sikh parents cutting their children's hair from day one….. Its so sad…….what about all those children that were cut to pieces for not giving up Sikhi ?
My apologies if I sound insensitive here but SGGS does not ask SIKHS to have unshorn hair. In fact it is the other way around as there are many tukks ridiculing unshorn hair in the Granth sahib.
Unshorn hair is an article of faith for KHALSA PANTH and, like other kakkars, came much after the 10th Guru's demise.
While all Khalsas are Sikhs, all Sikhs (like 9 Gurus and even the 10th Guru who spent most of his life without any such article of faith) are not supposed to be Khalsas.
This is so beyond far-fetched, I'm at a loss for words. I hope that no one has the guts to speak up on this issue any further because it completely mis-represents the Sikh population who are not so sensitive. I for one as a Sikh am humiliated to be represented by such levels of atrocity. Move on to more important things in life. If you don't like the book, keep it at that. Burning the book is so unnecessary and will only cause more damage to everything the Sikh community has been working toward in terms of education and support in light of recent events.
I read the book. Just finished it today. I don't remember reading anywhere that Sukhvinder is baptized. Her father shaves and doesn't want Guru Nanak's picture in the living room. The mother is not baptized certainly. Sukhvinder isn't even that religious and never do I see her trying to use religion to solve her problems.