“Our Guru is a living Guru.” I have heard this sentence in gurdwaras for as long as I can remember, and I have said it myself. It is true, but its meaning deserves more care than repetition alone can give it.

Does a living Guru require a human body? Is the relationship complete when the saroop, the physical form of Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, is properly honoured? Can an institution keep the teaching current by changing its meaning? These questions place authority in different hands. Gurbani establishes the relationship between Guru and disciple.

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji says:

ਸਬਦੁ ਗੁਰੂ ਸੁਰਤਿ ਧੁਨਿ ਚੇਲਾ ॥

sabad guroo surat dhun chelaa.

The Shabad is Guru; consciousness attentively attuned to it is the disciple.

Ramkali, Sidh Gosht, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, stanza 44, Panna 943. One-line excerpt. [1]

The line tells me who is Guru and what a disciple must become. Surat is consciousness or attentive awareness. I do not make the Guru living by listening. The question is whether I listen and live as a disciple beneath the Guru. Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji makes the relationship with Bani explicit:

ਬਾਣੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੁਰੂ ਹੈ ਬਾਣੀ ਵਿਚਿ ਬਾਣੀ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤੁ ਸਾਰੇ ॥
ਗੁਰੁ ਬਾਣੀ ਕਹੈ ਸੇਵਕੁ ਜਨੁ ਮਾਨੈ ਪਰਤਖਿ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਿਸਤਾਰੇ ॥੫॥

baanee guroo guroo hai baanee vich baanee amrit saare.
gur baanee kahai sevak jan maanai partakh guroo nistaare.

Bani is Guru, and Guru is Bani; within Bani Amrit is held. The Guru speaks Bani; when the servant accepts and follows it, the Guru certainly carries the servant across.

Nat, Mahalla 4, Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji, verse 5 of the Shabad ending 8.4, Panna 982. Continuous two-line excerpt; the Shabad continues. [2]

This passage gives substance to the word living. Bani teaches, and the servant receives and follows the teaching. The Guru carries the servant across. The complete Shabad also speaks of refuge, devotion, longing and grace. The relationship cannot be reduced to understanding instructions or improving ourselves by our own strength.

The Guru’s present authority comes through the complete Bani already given; living Guruship does not authorise new revelation or the rewriting of Bani. Nor does a feeling permit me to make a line say whatever I want. Hukam should not be treated as a prediction of the future. The Sangat seeks guidance from Bani, with attention to the complete Shabad, its grammar and, where present, the Rahao that marks its central thought. The Guru speaks through what the Guru has already given.

One Guru through changing bodies

I understand why someone might think that a living Guru must be a human being. A teacher can answer a question or settle a dispute, and immediate human presence can feel more alive than words being read. But the relationship given in Gurbani is not confined to the biological life of one body. Rai Balwand and Satta Doom say:

ਜੋਤਿ ਓਹਾ ਜੁਗਤਿ ਸਾਇ ਸਹਿ ਕਾਇਆ ਫੇਰਿ ਪਲਟੀਐ ॥

jot ohaa jugat saai seh kaaiaa fer palteeai.

The Light is the same. The way is the same. The Sovereign has only changed the body.

Ramkali Ki Vaar of Rai Balwand and Satta Doom, pauri 2, Pannas 966–967. One-line excerpt on Panna 966; the pauri continues onto Panna 967. [3]

The passage concerns the succession from Guru Nanak Sahib Ji to Guru Angad Sahib Ji. The bodies were real and honoured; the Gurus were not interchangeable teachers with similar ideas. The same Guru-Jot, the Guru’s Light, and Jugat, the way, continued through the change of body. That explains continuity across the human Gurus. The later succession is a separate historical matter: Sikhi recognises Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji as the last Guru in human form and Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji as the enduring Guru. The received account places that succession at Nanded in 1708. [4]

Namdhari teaching maintains continuing human Guruship beyond Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji. This is a clear disagreement about Sikh authority. It should be stated accurately, without contempt towards Namdhari people. [5]

Radha Soami Satsang Beas, or RSSB, presents a different teaching. Its official Seekers’ Guide says followers need not abandon their existing religion, but initiation under a perfect living Master’s authority is necessary to connect the soul with Shabd. It promises eventual liberation. The guide also calls Shabd the real Master and surat the real disciple, allows initiation through an appointed representative, and teaches that the spiritual Master survives bodily death. [6]

The disagreement therefore concerns RSSB’s requirement that a living human Master authorise initiation. RSSB’s Shabd is described as an inner sound current; the shared term does not establish an identical understanding. Gurbani gives the Sikh’s relationship with the Guru through Shabad and Bani. A teacher may help me understand, but cannot claim Guruship or become the required authority through whom I must gain access to the Guru.

Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji says:

ਸਾਹਿਬੁ ਮੇਰਾ ਸਦਾ ਹੈ ਦਿਸੈ ਸਬਦੁ ਕਮਾਇ ॥
ਓਹੁ ਅਉਹਾਣੀ ਕਦੇ ਨਾਹਿ ਨਾ ਆਵੈ ਨਾ ਜਾਇ ॥

saahib meraa sadaa hai disai sabad kamaai.
oh auhaanee kade naahi naa aavai naa jaai.

My Master is eternal and is seen by living the Shabad. The Master never perishes, neither comes nor goes.

Later in the same Salok:

ਅਵਰੁ ਦੂਜਾ ਕਿਉ ਸੇਵੀਐ ਜੰਮੈ ਤੈ ਮਰਿ ਜਾਇ ॥

avar doojaa kiu seveeai jammai tai mar jaai.

Why serve another who is born and then dies?

Gujri Ki Vaar, Salok Mahalla 3, Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji, Salok 1 before pauri 2, Panna 509. Selected non-consecutive lines: lines 1–2 and 4; line 3 and the concluding lines are omitted. [7]

The Salok directs service towards the eternal One, present in all and encountered through living the Shabad. It does not supply a history of succession after 1708 or a biological test by which the ten Gurus could be judged. Its place here is to establish whom the Sikh serves. Human assistance must remain service beneath the Guru.

Reverence that continues into listening

The question also belongs within ordinary gurdwara life. We can reject continuing human Guruship yet act as though the relationship were complete because the saroop is present and properly honoured.

When I enter the darbar, I do not believe I am approaching an ordinary book. I bow before Guru Sahib. Parkash, sukhasan, the canopy, the rumale and chaur sahib express that recognition. Guru Arjun Sahib Ji says:

ਪੋਥੀ ਪਰਮੇਸਰ ਕਾ ਥਾਨੁ ॥
ਸਾਧਸੰਗਿ ਗਾਵਹਿ ਗੁਣ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ਪੂਰਨ ਬ੍ਰਹਮ ਗਿਆਨੁ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

pothee parmesar kaa thaan.
saadhsang gaavahi gun gobind pooran brahm giaan. Rahao.

The Pothi is the place of meeting Parmesar. Those who sing Gobind’s virtues in the Guru’s company come to know the all-pervading One intimately.

Saarang, Mahalla 5, Guru Arjun Sahib Ji, Shabad ending 2.90.113, Panna 1226. Complete two-line Rahao; the rest of the Shabad is not quoted. [8]

The Rahao joins the Pothi with singing, the Guru’s company and deep knowledge of the One. The Shabad continues into grace and a prayer that the Creator should never be forgotten, even for a moment. Reverence belongs within this relationship. Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji also shows why seeing alone cannot complete it:

ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਨੋ ਸਭੁ ਕੋ ਵੇਖਦਾ ਜੇਤਾ ਜਗਤੁ ਸੰਸਾਰੁ ॥
ਡਿਠੈ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਨ ਹੋਵਈ ਜਿਚਰੁ ਸਬਦਿ ਨ ਕਰੇ ਵੀਚਾਰੁ ॥
ਹਉਮੈ ਮੈਲੁ ਨ ਚੁਕਈ ਨਾਮਿ ਨ ਲਗੈ ਪਿਆਰੁ ॥

satigur no sabh ko vekhdaa jetaa jagat sansaar.
ditthai mukat na hovaee jichar sabad na kare veechaar.
haumai mail na chukaee naam na lagai piaar.

Everyone in the world beholds the Satguru. Seeing alone does not bring liberation unless one reflects within the Shabad. The filth of haumai is not removed, and love for Naam does not arise.

Wadhans Ki Vaar, Salok Mahalla 3, Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji, Salok 1 before pauri 21, Panna 594. Continuous excerpt of the opening three lines; two lines follow. [9]

Haumai is the self-centred assertion of I. The Salok does not end with the limits of seeing: it continues into grace, the relinquishing of division and wrongdoing, and meeting through love for the Satguru as self-conceit falls away. The answer is reverence continuing into Shabad-vichaar, love and the life the Guru teaches.

Consider a gurdwara where every protocol is observed, but the Hukam remains unexplained. Or imagine a religious personality whose photograph and birthday command more attention than the Bani. These are possible failures we should recognise in ourselves and our institutions. A teacher serves the Sangat by helping it hear the Guru; the teacher’s personality must not become the authority that decides what Shabad is allowed to say.

Institutions under the Guru

Sikh institutions face changing laws, technologies and political conditions. They must deliberate about how Gurmat should be applied. That responsibility does not give them ownership of the Guru’s meaning. Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji says:

ਇਕਾ ਬਾਣੀ ਇਕੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਇਕੋ ਸਬਦੁ ਵੀਚਾਰਿ ॥

ikaa baanee ik gur iko sabad veechaar.

There is one Bani, one Guru, and one Shabad to contemplate.

Sorath Ki Vaar, Salok Mahalla 3, Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji, Salok 2 before pauri 10, Panna 646. One-line excerpt; the Salok continues. [10]

The Salok continues with the richness of this gift and its reception through grace. Its opening gives a measure for collective responsibility. Sri Akal Takht Sahib, scholars, teachers and gurdwara committees must serve beneath the Guru. They have different duties, but none acquires a second source of Guruship.

A committee may administer a gurdwara, and a scholar may explain difficult language and context. Neither may make institutional interest, philosophy, science, nationalism or inherited religious assumptions govern Gurbani. Interpretation remains necessary and correctable; humility about our understanding is part of living beneath the Guru. Application can develop with circumstances, while every judgement remains answerable to the Shabad.

What this asks of us

The question is not settled by winning a debate with Namdhari or RSSB followers. It returns to the Sikh home, the gurdwara and the institutions entrusted with collective responsibility. Before arranging a Paath, a family should consider who will listen. When Hukam is taken, the Sangat should have help to understand it. A teacher should explain Bani, and a committee should make it easier for the Sangat to hear, understand and live the Shabad.

This also asks something of me. One Shabad should be heard carefully enough to challenge what I want to keep. The Guru may expose an anger I have justified, a wish to control hidden beneath what I called Seva, or a political position I wanted Gurbani to support. A resentment may need to be released, dishonesty stopped or a neglected duty accepted. Listening becomes demanding when it asks me to change.

The Guru is already living. The harder question is whether I still listen when the Guru contradicts me.

Sources

[1] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Sidh Gosht, stanza 44, Panna 943; read with the preceding question in stanza 43, Panna 942. Text; Professor Sahib Singh Ji, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Darpan.

[2] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Nat, Mahalla 4, Shabad ending 8.4, verse 5, Panna 982. Text; Professor Sahib Singh Ji, Darpan. Darpan reads “partakh” as certainly; SriGranth’s displayed English uses “in person”.

[3] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Ramkali Ki Vaar of Rai Balwand and Satta Doom, pauri 2, Pannas 966–967. Panna 966; continuation on Panna 967.

[4] SGPC, Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji biography, concluding Nanded and succession paragraphs. Source for the received institutional account of 1708.

[5] Namdhari Sikhs Australia, Namdhari Sikhs, opening succession account and concluding description of the physical human Satguru. Source for Namdhari belief.

[6] RSSB, Seekers’ Guide, updated 1 April 2026, printed pp. 3–4 and 21–25: teachings, the Master and initiation.

[7] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Gujri Ki Vaar, Salok Mahalla 3 beginning “Saahib meraa”, Panna 509. Complete Salok.

[8] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Saarang, Mahalla 5, Shabad ending 2.90.113, Panna 1226. Professor Sahib Singh Ji, Darpan, complete Shabad, word meanings and explanation.

[9] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Wadhans Ki Vaar, Salok Mahalla 3 beginning “Satigur no”, Panna 594. Text; Professor Sahib Singh Ji, Darpan, complete Salok.

[10] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Sorath Ki Vaar, Salok Mahalla 3, Salok 2 before pauri 10, Panna 646. Complete Salok.

Errors will be corrected publicly with a dated note.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

In Sidh Gosht, Guru Nanak Sahib speaks with a group of yogis. They ask whose pupil Guru Sahib is. This is part of the answer.

ਸਬਦੁ ਗੁਰੂ ਸੁਰਤਿ ਧੁਨਿ ਚੇਲਾ ॥

Simple reading
Shabad Guru surat dhun chela.

Plain meaning
Shabad is my Guru. My attention, held on Shabad, is the pupil.

Ramkali, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib, Sidh Gosht, Panna 943. One line from pauri 44. Read with pauris 43–44 and the Rahao on Panna 938. [1]

A pauri is one part of a longer poem. Rahao asks us to pause and helps us find the main thought.

A Shabad is a verse or group of verses from the Guru’s Word. To keep my mind on Shabad, I have to listen long enough for the Guru to change me. That applies to the people whose books I read. It applies to me when I write about Gurbani.

A reader told me we need to know Vedanta to understand much of Gurbani. Vedanta is a group of Hindu teachings about God and the world. The reader also said that all the early commentaries followed a school of Vedanta called Advaita. I wanted to see what some of those writers said. If someone says we need Vedanta to understand a Shabad, I would like us to read it together. Where do we need that help?

What did Santokh Singh teach?

At the start of Japji Sahib we read ੴ, Ik Oankar. Bhai Santokh Singh asks why Guru Nanak Sahib put the number one before Oankar when Hindu texts such as the Vedas did not. His answer is that Guru Sahib put the meaning of the Vedas into the language people spoke. He says people living in Kalyug, an age when people had lost their way, needed that help. He also says that the earlier Vedas were Guru Nanak Sahib’s own teaching. [2]

Santokh Singh starts with the idea that Japji Sahib has to agree with the Vedas. On the first page of his explanation of ੴ, he says why. In his view, any difference would mean that Guru Sahib was contradicting the earlier teaching. His rule decides what Japji Sahib can mean in advance. I call that a distortion of Japji Sahib. [2]

If I teach this as Gurmat, the Guru’s teaching, a child can grow up believing that the Guru’s words must fit the Vedas. I have handed down Santokh Singh’s rule for reading as though it came from the Guru.

Santokh Singh studied Gurbani, Sanskrit, philosophy and mythology under Giani Sant Singh in Amritsar. Anandghan was a scholar in the Udasi order, founded by Baba Sri Chand, the elder son of Guru Nanak Sahib. Udasi scholars preached Gurbani. Anandghan studied in Kashi, also called Varanasi, and finished his book on Japji Sahib in 1795. Bhai Udai Singh, the ruler of Kaithal, commissioned Santokh Singh to write a reply. Santokh Singh finished Garab Ganjani Tika in 1829. It was first printed in 1910. Guru Arjan Sahib had compiled the Adi Granth in 1604, and Bhai Gurdas had written his Vaars long before these two books. [3]

The same Light and the same way

When Guru Angad Sahib became Guru after Guru Nanak Sahib, the person the Sikhs saw before them had changed. In a Vaar, a long poem, Rai Balwand and Satta tell us what stayed the same.

ਜੋਤਿ ਓਹਾ ਜੁਗਤਿ ਸਾਇ ਸਹਿ ਕਾਇਆ ਫੇਰਿ ਪਲਟੀਐ ॥

Simple reading
Jot ohaa jugat saai, seh kaaiaa pher palteeai.

Plain meaning
The Light is the same and the way is the same. The Guru has changed the body.

Ramkali Ki Vaar, Rai Balwand and Satta, Panna 966. One line from pauri 2. The pauri continues onto Panna 967. [4]

In Gurmat Nirnaya Sagar, Pandit Tara Singh Narotam says the Guru’s words should come first when we look for proof. He allows texts such as the Vedas and Puranas in support. I will follow Narotam’s own rule and read what he wrote alongside the Guru’s words. [5]

On page 53, Narotam turns to the Vedas and Puranas for proof that Guru Nanak Sahib was an incarnation. An incarnation is the Divine taking form in the world. The Puranas are Hindu books that tell stories about gods and the world.

On page 59, Narotam uses Ram and Krishna as examples of a group with complete divine powers. He puts Guru Nanak Sahib and Guru Gobind Singh Sahib in that group and says they may be called full incarnations. He puts Guru Angad Sahib, Guru Amar Das Sahib and Guru Ram Das Sahib in a group he describes as receiving divine power later. He puts other Gurus in a third group. [5]

Narotam puts Guru Angad Sahib in a group he says received divine power later. The Vaar says the Light and the way stayed the same when Guru Angad Sahib became Guru. On page 59, Narotam lets those groups decide how to understand Guruship. This goes against his own rule that the Guru’s words come first. I reject his classification because it distorts what Gurbani teaches about Guruship. [4] [5]

A child taught from page 59 might ask me, “Did Guru Angad Sahib carry less of the Light?” That question comes from the way Narotam divides the Gurus. I would read the Vaar with the child so we could see what Gurbani says about Guru Angad Sahib.

Narotam trained in the Nirmala tradition, which had a particular interest in classical Hindu philosophy, especially Vedanta. He studied Sanskrit and the Vedas in Kashi. Around 1861, Maharaja Narinder Singh offered him his support. Narotam took up the Maharaja’s invitation and settled in Patiala. [5]

In Punjabi University’s Encyclopaedia of Sikhism, Professor Rattan Singh Jaggi says Narotam used Waheguru to mean Vishnu alone. Narotam’s own book gives several meanings. On page 576 he gives one about nirgun Brahm, the One beyond any qualities we can describe. I ask the editors to read the original passage and revise the entry so readers can see the range of meanings Narotam gave. [5]

Read the whole Shabad

When a child asks what a name means in Gurbani, I would read the whole Shabad with them. In one of Guru Arjan Sahib’s Bhairo Shabads, the Rahao calls the One Guvind, a form of the name Gobind. The opening verse helps us see whom Guru Sahib is speaking of.

ਕੋਟਿ ਬਿਸਨ ਕੀਨੇ ਅਵਤਾਰ ॥
ਕੋਟਿ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੰਡ ਜਾ ਕੇ ਧ੍ਰਮਸਾਲ ॥
ਕੋਟਿ ਮਹੇਸ ਉਪਾਇ ਸਮਾਏ ॥
ਕੋਟਿ ਬ੍ਰਹਮੇ ਜਗੁ ਸਾਜਣ ਲਾਏ ॥੧॥

Simple reading
Kot bisan keene avtaar.
Kot brahmand jaa ke dharamsaal.
Kot mahes upaae samaae.
Kot brahme jag saajan laae.

Plain meaning
The One brought forth more forms of Vishnu than we can count. Countless worlds belong to the One. They are places to do what is right. The One brings countless Shivas into being and takes them back. The One gives countless Brahmas the work of making worlds.

Bhairo, Mahalla 5, Guru Arjan Sahib, Panna 1156. Opening verse of the Shabad ending 8.2.5 on Panna 1157. Read with the Rahao. [6]

If I tell a child that Guvind here can only mean Vishnu, how will I explain this verse? In this Shabad, Guvind brings forth countless forms of Vishnu. In the last verse, Guru Sahib tells us that the One we cannot see with our eyes is there in every heart. If I stop at the name and give the child the meaning I already know, I leave all that out of the lesson.

In the passages we read here, the words around each line helped us understand it. We could follow the teaching without starting from Vedanta. To judge the claim about all the early writers, we would have to read their books one by one.

What they brought to their reading

The Nirmala tradition traces its beginnings to Sikhs sent to Kashi to learn Sanskrit. The order’s scholars became known for their interest in Vedanta. That learning gave them ways to explain sacred texts and speak about the Divine. [3]

Santokh Singh treated the earlier Vedas as the Guru’s own teaching. Once he started there, any difference between Japji Sahib and the Vedas looked like a contradiction. Narotam studied the Vedas in Kashi. When he wrote about the Gurus, he used Puranic categories to decide where each Guru belonged on a scale of divine power. [2] [5]

Punjabi University’s Encyclopaedia of Sikhism describes Anandghan as drawing heavily on the Upanishads. Whether Anandghan gave the Vedas the same weight as Santokh Singh is a question for his own commentary. [3] [8]

Sikh chiefs supported Nirmala centres. The rulers of Patiala, Nabha and Jind helped set up the centre where Narotam later wrote and taught. That gave him a place to pass on his way of reading Gurbani. [3] [5]

What was in their hearts is beyond me. We can see where they studied and judge what they wrote against Gurbani.

What reaches readers today

In 2022, SikhTranslations put Santokh Singh’s explanation of ੴ into English. The project says it drew on the Sri Guru Granth Sahib Academy’s Panjabi edition. The English keeps his first claim that Gurbani holds the wisdom of the Vedas. On page 5 of the scan they link to, the next sentence says the earlier Vedas were Guru Nanak Sahib’s own teaching. The English version at that point speaks of “Western Traditions (Abrahamic Faiths)”. I ask the translators to show readers where those words come from. [7]

Raja Bikram Singh of Faridkot commissioned the Faridkot Tika. Sikh scholars from several schools revised the first draft before it went to print. Copies went to Gurdwaras and scholars. Singh Sabhas and Khalsa Diwans later asked for more changes. The proposed revision fell through and the old text went back into print. A book can go from a ruler’s commission to the shelves of a Gurdwara. When people hear the same reading over the years, they may come to call it the traditional explanation. Each reading still needs to be tested against Gurbani. [8]

Publishers should tell readers whose explanation they are printing. The claim that Gurbani carries the meaning of the Vedas is Santokh Singh’s. Teachers should put that claim beside Japji Sahib and show where it comes from. Where these readings have been taught as Gurmat, teachers and Gurdwara committees should put that right. Tell the Sangat whose claims they are and read the Gurbani alongside them.

Who gets to tell Sikhs who we are?

The question of who gets the last word comes up again when others try to decide who Sikhs are. The reader also said some Hindus would question whether the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) follows the Vedas. In Essentials of Hindutva, V D Savarkar named Udasi and Nirmala groups as part of his case for counting Sikhs as Hindu. In his view, Sikhs could reject the authority of the Vedas and he would still call them Hindu. What a writer borrowed from the Puranas tells us about that writer’s reading. It gives Savarkar no authority to decide who Sikhs are. [9]

The RSS is a volunteer movement founded in India in 1925 to organise Hindu society. It sets out its own view in Why Hindu Rashtra? It says that anyone who is an Indian national is Hindu, whatever faith they follow. So under the RSS definition, an Indian who says “I am Sikh” is still counted as Hindu. I learn what it means to be Sikh from Shabad Guru Granth Sahib. The RSS has no right to decide what it means to be Sikh. [10]

If a child asks me where I found the meaning of a line, I should be able to show them. If I say the Guru’s words must fit what a writer has already decided, I have given the writer the last word. Here the commentary has taken the Guru’s place. If we read the Shabad together and I find I got it wrong, I should say so and put it right. The Guru can correct any of us.

Sources

Source checks were made on 8 and 9 November 2026. The Gurbani text and context checks from 8 November are retained. The plain meanings draw on Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan. The historical translations and judgements are the writer’s.

[1] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib, Ramkali, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib, Sidh Gosht, complete pauris 43–44, Pannas 942–943, with Rahao on Panna 938. SriGranth 943. See also Darpan 942, 943, 938. Displayed line also compared with SearchGurbani-formatted Panna 943. Darpan’s explanation on Panna 943 was checked again on 9 November.

[2] Bhai Santokh Singh, Sri Japu Sahib Steek: Garab Ganjani Tika, Amritsar: Bhai Jawahar Singh Kirpal Singh & Co., October 1986, printed p.5, PDF p.26. Original scanned page. Printed p. 5 was checked again on 9 November. The final lines of the commentary on that page explain why Santokh Singh expects Gurbani and the earlier Vedas to agree. See also the complete PDF. The key phrase is ਤਿਸ ਬੇਦ ਕੇ ਹੀ ਅਰਥ ਦੇਸ ਭਾਸ਼ਾ ਮੈਂ ਬਨਾਇ, meaning “rendering the meanings of that very Veda into the local language”.

[3] Punjabi University, Encyclopaedia of Sikhism. Rattan Singh Jaggi, Anandghana Svami. Jai Bhagwan Goel, Santokh Singh Bhai. Gurdev Singh, Garab Ganjani Tika. For the earlier chronology, see the SGPC’s account of the 1604 compilation and the Encyclopaedia’s entry on Bhai Gurdas. For the traditions, see Udasi and Nirmala. See also the reproduced Encyclopaedia entry on Udai Singh’s request for the commentary. The entries on Anandghan, Santokh Singh, the Udasis and the Nirmalas, and the account of Udai Singh’s request, were checked on 9 November. Earlier checks are retained for the other references.

[4] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib, Ramkali Ki Vaar, Rai Balwand and Satta, complete pauri 2, Pannas 966–967. Darpan 966 and 967. SriGranth 966. Displayed line also compared with SearchGurbani-formatted Panna 966.

[5] Pandit Tara Singh Narotam, Granth Sri Gurmat Nirnaya Sagar, Anglo-Sanskrit Press, Lahore, for Sardar Buta Singh Rai Bahadur. The consulted edition was printed after Narotam’s death in Bikrami Samvat 1955, dated to 1898 by Dharam Singh’s Encyclopaedia entry. See the scanned edition, printed p. 11 (PDF p. 21) on the order of evidence, p. 53 (PDF p. 63) on the appeal to the Vedas and Puranas, and p. 59 (PDF p. 69) on the categories of incarnation. The categories discussed in the essay are vibhuti, avesha and amsha. Vahiguru Shabdarth is on printed pp. 559–577. See p. 576 (PDF p. 588) for nirgun Brahm. Compare Rattan Singh Jaggi’s entry on Narotam. See also Jaggi’s 2023 Padma Shri citation for his academic title.

[6] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib, Bhairo, Mahalla 5, Guru Arjan Sahib, complete eight-stanza Shabad ending 8.2.5, Pannas 1156–1157. SriGranth 1156 and 1157. See also Darpan, complete commentary under 1156 and a third reproduction. “Places for living rightly” renders dharamsaal.

[7] SikhTranslations, Ik Oangkaar, 12 December 2022, identifies printed p.5/PDF p.26 of Garab Ganjani. The project introduction, 14 October 2022, identifies its reliance on the Academy’s Panjabi edition. Compare the English “Answer” paragraph with printed p. 5 (PDF p. 26) in the scan linked by the translators.

[8] Major Gurmukh Singh, Punjabi University, Faridkot Tika, account of the commission, revision by Sikh scholars before publication, distribution, and later requests for further revision.

[9] V D Savarkar, Essentials of Hindutva, official-site transcription, PDF p. 47 for the named groups and Savarkar’s sentence, “They thereby may cease to be Sanatanis, but cannot cease to be Hindus.” He uses Sanatanis here for followers of Sanatan Dharma in his orthodox sense of the term.

[10] RSS, Why Hindu Rashtra?, 22 October 2012, section “Hindu: National of Bharat”. Used for the organisation’s own identity claim. Its 2017 FAQ gives its full name, founding date and stated purpose.

Related work

Who Decides What Bhagat Bani Means? and When Science Tries to Explain the Guru.

Errors will be corrected publicly with a dated note. Anyone named here may reply, and a substantive reply will be published with the article.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

Karan Bir Singh Sidhu, usually known as KBS Sidhu, was Amritsar’s Deputy Commissioner from 11 May 1992 to 11 August 1996. He also served as District Magistrate, a senior official outside the police whose job included checking police work. [4] Reports of police abuse were reaching newspapers, courts and human rights organisations. His office had powers to find out what was happening. His later writing does not explain his own response to the Jeobala case. [5, 6, 12, 13, 16]

Given his position and his close work with police chiefs, I believe Sidhu has more to tell us about what the district administration knew and did during these years. [11] He writes on many subjects. For the sake of these families, he should now write about these cases and any others he knows of. He should tell them what he knew, what he did and what he can explain about their relatives. If he does not know what happened to a particular person, he should say what he did to find out. The families should not have to obtain government files before he tells them what he remembers. He owes them a full and truthful account.

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji describes a freedom deeper than the approval of powerful people:

ਹਰਖੁ ਸੋਗੁ ਜਾ ਕੈ ਨਹੀ ਬੈਰੀ ਮੀਤ ਸਮਾਨਿ ॥
ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਸੁਨਿ ਰੇ ਮਨਾ ਮੁਕਤਿ ਤਾਹਿ ਤੈ ਜਾਨਿ ॥੧੫॥
ਭੈ ਕਾਹੂ ਕਉ ਦੇਤ ਨਹਿ ਨਹਿ ਭੈ ਮਾਨਤ ਆਨ ॥
ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਸੁਨਿ ਰੇ ਮਨਾ ਗਿਆਨੀ ਤਾਹਿ ਬਖਾਨਿ ॥੧੬॥

Simple reading: Harakh sog ja kai nahee bairee meet samaan.
Kahu Nanak sun re mana mukat taahi tai jaan. 15.
Bhai kaahoo kau det nah neh bhai maanat aan.
Kahu Nanak sun re mana giaanee taahi bakhaan. 16.

Plain meaning: One who is not ruled by joy or sorrow, and who sees enemy and friend alike: Nanak says, listen, O mind, know that person to be free. One who frightens no one and does not give in to anyone’s threats: Nanak says, listen, O mind, call that person spiritually wise.

Reference: Salok Mahalla 9, Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji, Panna 1427; complete Saloks 15–16, a continuous excerpt from the sequence. Panna means page. [1]

Guru Sahib describes a life turned towards the Creator. In the surrounding Saloks, this freedom includes not being ruled by greed, pride or the wish for praise. This does not tell a grieving family to stop feeling sorrow. It asks us to look at what guides our own choices. Fear can stop us helping someone. Affection can make us excuse a leader we admire. Anger can make us blame a whole community for what particular people did.

That teaching applies to me too. When people need protection, I must do what I can to help. A Sikh in public office can reach people whom frightened families cannot. I expect him to use that access and keep pressing when help is refused, even at the cost of his post. A Sikh should not need a public post before caring about someone in danger.

Across these essays I ask what a Sikh’s office meant when a family needed help. Who Holds the Chain examines attachment to office and praise; When a Sikh Home Becomes a Target examines the President and his press secretary. Here, I judge Sidhu by how he used his position to find people taken by police and press for their protection.

The families before Bhai Khalra Ji

Param Satinderjit Singh was a student at Guru Nanak Dev University in Amritsar. Amnesty International’s appeal of 23 September 1992 reported that police had taken him on 18 May and that his family still did not know where he was. His father had reportedly spent fifteen days on hunger strike outside the Amritsar police chief’s office, asking where his son was. Amnesty had written to Chief Minister Beant Singh in June seeking information and assurances for the student’s safety. By September, it reported receiving no reply. [13]

Dead Silence records university staff and students taking Param’s case to the Amritsar police chief and Panjab’s Chief Secretary. It reports the police chief telling them that “the law only exists in the books”. Promised family access did not follow. Reduced to Ashes, published in 2003, still described Param as untraced. [13]

His father needed someone to make the police answer while his son might still be saved. A public hunger strike and university delegations should have brought the case to the district administration’s attention. I have found no evidence of help from Sidhu’s office. Failing to notice such pleas, or accepting police answers without checking them, would be a failure of his job. A father’s chance of finding his child should not depend on how much noise he can make.

Gulshan Kumar came from a Hindu family in Tarn Taran, and the duty to protect reached his family too. Police took him from his home on 22 June 1993. His brother Bobby later described the family taking food to the police station while Gulshan remained there. A month later, the family learned that he had been killed in what police presented as a gun battle. His body was cremated without being returned to them. In June 2024, the court that heard the case sentenced former police officers Dilbagh Singh to seven years for kidnapping and Gurbachan Singh to life imprisonment for murder and other offences. [14]

His father, Chaman Lal, pursued the case but died in 2016, before those decisions. His sons continued it. In July 2026, Bobby’s son Shiva told a reporter that he was attending hearings in a higher court, where the decisions were being challenged. [14] A father, his sons and now a grandson had been drawn into the fight for an answer.

Gulshan’s family had taken food to him in police custody. They needed the civil authorities to question that detention while he was alive. Sidhu’s published accounts do not say what his office did for him. Any inquiry should be judged by whether it challenged the police account and helped establish the truth, rather than simply by whether a file was opened. Chaman Lal should not have had to spend the rest of his life pursuing the case.

The later Jeobala record includes a civil inquiry. In 2017, the Punjab and Haryana High Court described evidence collected by the Central Bureau of Investigation (CBI), India’s central investigating agency. It referred to an inquiry by L.D. Hans, an Additional Deputy Commissioner at Tarn Taran, which supported an account of the men being seen in police custody. The passage neither dates that inquiry nor identifies Sidhu’s part in it. [12] We must examine this evidence of action, including what followed it, without assigning the inquiry to Sidhu on an assumption.

In March 2023, a CBI court convicted former Inspector Surinderpal Singh of kidnapping and wrongful confinement in the Jeobala case; three others were acquitted. In April, the court sentenced him to ten years’ imprisonment. [12] More than thirty years had passed since the men were taken. A later conviction cannot make up for the years their families lost.

The warnings during those years

In May 1994, Human Rights Watch and Physicians for Human Rights published Dead Silence, documenting police killings, disappearances and torture. The Jeobala account was part of that report. [12]

In October 1995, Amnesty International referred to an Indian Express report of 3 February about unclaimed cremations at Patti and families who had not been informed. It also described a January petition claiming that more than 2,000 families in Amritsar district were awaiting missing relatives, supported by cremation records. These were allegations requiring investigation, not proof that every missing person had been murdered. [16] They called for the administration to check police accounts and help families find out what had happened. That work should not have been left to relatives and people risking their safety to assist them.

Sidhu’s own writing places him close to the men running the police. In August 2026, he said he worked closely with the district police chiefs and recalled “daily abductions, encounters and killings” that had eased by February 1994. [11] This describes the wider violence, not an admission that every incident was a police crime. But he held a job that required him to question police conduct.

These reports show why Sidhu’s office had to seek information. He did not need to witness a killing before asking what police were doing. If complaints did not reach him, his administration’s checks on the police also need to be explained. Families should not have had to find their own way to the District Magistrate before someone in his office began asking questions.

What Sidhu’s office could do

Tarn Taran lay within Sidhu’s civil district, although its police had a separate chief. [4] The Superintendent, the district police chief, commanded the police under the District Magistrate’s general control and direction. The Magistrate had to inspect police stations. Through the Superintendent, he could require information and inquiries into misconduct by subordinate police officers. Complaints about more senior officers could be raised with the Deputy Inspector-General. His approval was needed for posting, removing or transferring police station chiefs. His powers excluded matters dealing only with the force’s internal management, training and discipline. [5]

The law required police station chiefs to report arrests made without a warrant, a written order to make an arrest. Reports went to the District Magistrate, or to a Sub-divisional Magistrate if he directed. The latter served a smaller part of the district. The District Magistrate could also issue a search warrant if he had reason to believe a person’s confinement amounted to a crime. [6]

Police could conceal an arrest, and a search could fail. That made independent checking more important. Accepting a denial without testing it could fail a family without actively concealing a crime. Passing a complaint back to officers accused of taking someone’s relative was not enough on its own. The official needed to pursue an answer despite police resistance.

India’s National Human Rights Commission recommended regular district meetings chaired by District Magistrates, information about arrests and detention, and prompt answers to families in its 1994–95 annual report. It called for restoring the authority of magistrates and the judiciary over police in Panjab. [15] These were recommendations, not proof that such meetings took place in Amritsar. Sidhu’s account should explain what checks his district made.

In an article of 24 October 2026, Sidhu says a police report could not replace a magistrate’s own judgement. [8] He is discussing steps to prevent a breach of the peace, a different kind of case. Independent judgement also mattered when police were accused of taking someone away. How he exercised it in Amritsar needs examining.

What did he know and what did he do

Sidhu should explain what information reached him, what checks he made, what action he took and what happened when he sought answers. If police obstructed him, he should say how he challenged that obstruction and whom he approached next. Helping conceal a crime is a separate allegation that would need evidence. We can still judge whether he did his duty to find out and help. Being intelligent and able to write well does not establish how he behaved in office.

His office should have checked families’ accounts against police arrest reports and followed up missing names. Suspicious deaths required examination, including hospital and cremation records. In his August article, Sidhu recalls ordering an inquest, an inquiry into a death, in one case. He does not name the person, give a date or state the findings. We cannot identify the case or tell what his intervention achieved. [11]

Bhai Khalra Ji and others found cremation records describing bodies as unidentified or unclaimed. Those words alone do not prove murder; they must be examined with families’ accounts and other evidence. [2, 16] A family might still be waiting for someone whose body had already been burned. The authorities needed to help uncover that truth.

These delays cost families years of their lives. The Tribune reports that the Jeobala trial was stayed from 2004 to 2018 on petitions by the accused officers. [12] Chaman Lal died before the trial decisions in Gulshan’s case; his descendants carried on. Families needed officials to pursue the truth and help them obtain it. Sidhu can explain his decisions now. The records are needed to test his statements, not as a reason to put off judging his service.

When Bhai Khalra Ji was taken

On 6 September 1995, police took Bhai Jaswant Singh Ji Khalra away by force. His wife, Bibi Paramjit Kaur Khalra Ji, could not find out where he was or whether he was alive. India’s Supreme Court later said that the higher authorities in the administration had neither helped her nor told her where her husband was. Five officers were found guilty in his case and sentenced to life imprisonment; the Supreme Court upheld those decisions in 2011. Its judgment does not name Sidhu or decide his own responsibility. [2]

In his July 2026 writing about Bhai Khalra Ji and the film about him, Sidhu says people came to his office after the abduction. He contacted senior police officers, who denied holding Bhai Khalra Ji, and ordered an inquiry by a magistrate. He says he later gave evidence to the CBI and to the court. His inquiry was unfinished when the Supreme Court intervened. [7] These are claims of action. They need to be checked and assessed for what they achieved.

Bibi Paramjit Kaur Khalra Ji needed her husband found while he could still be saved. Recording statements and later giving evidence could help establish responsibility, but her immediate need was to get him home. Sidhu says his inquiry could not decide criminal guilt. That did not remove the duty to test police denials and keep pressing for his whereabouts. I judge his response by what he did to pursue that search, including after the police refused answers.

Sidhu can recall particular calls and decisions in this case. Other families deserve the same care.

The account he gives now

In September 2026, Sidhu wrote that the rule requiring his approval of police station chiefs’ postings had been ignored during his Amritsar years. He called for proper checks by officials outside the police. [9] This was a safeguard attached to the office he held. Its failure makes his own response important. Did he challenge the postings, raise the breach with those above him or allow the practice to continue without objection? His account does not settle those questions. The difficulty of challenging the police cannot itself establish that he tried.

Asked in July about regrets over his years in Amritsar, Sidhu said he had none and believed he would make the same decisions again. He left the judgement to the people and history. [7] The families are among those people. I do not accept that confident judgement of his service without an explanation of what he did for families like these. Their suffering cannot be left outside his assessment of the decisions he would repeat.

The Saloks describe a person who neither frightens others nor gives in to threats. I bring that measure to the decision to remain in office when protection is refused. An official may be obstructed, but that cannot be the end of his responsibility. Remaining in office should have meant continuing to use it for people in danger.

In a public reply on 12 July 2026, Sidhu said that where the CBI, NHRC or court records differed from his memory, the records should govern. [7] His account can be tested against those records. Karan Bir Singh Sidhu is invited to answer these points, and a substantive reply will be published with this article.

Praise for the leaders

Sidhu also helps shape what people believe about the men who led Panjab during those years. On 15 July 2026, he called police chief K.P.S. Gill “a strong and courageous police leader” and credited his work against terrorism. He gave Beant Singh’s elected government much of the credit for bringing peace. In August, he defended Gill’s reputation against criticism. [10, 11]

He also condemns unlawful killings and says officers who commit crimes should face trial. He accepts that Bhai Khalra Ji’s kidnapping, torture and murder were proved in court. [10, 11] But credit for leadership brings responsibility for its failures. His praise must answer what Gill and Beant Singh did to prevent police crimes, respond to complaints and protect families. A general condemnation of murder does not answer those questions, or explain his own conduct.

The United States government’s report on 1993 described the disappearance of lawyer Kulwant Singh, his wife and child after he was called to Ropar police station. It reported that Beant Singh agreed to an inquiry but backed down when police opposed it. This was contemporary reporting, not a court finding, and Sidhu was not this family’s District Magistrate. [3] An account of that government must also face the allegation that police resistance stopped an inquiry into what happened to a lawyer, his wife and their child.

The government had to protect people from armed violence and from its own police. Calling the result peace cannot settle what happened to the families in Jeobala, to Param Satinderjit Singh or to Gulshan Kumar. Convictions of individual officers do not settle every question about leadership. Beant Singh died before Bhai Khalra Ji was taken, and neither he nor Gill was convicted in that case. [2, 3, 7] Sidhu’s praise shows how he chooses to present their leadership now.

In another August account, Sidhu describes the fear in Amritsar when a child returning from tuition was even half an hour late. [11] He understands that fear. These parents were waiting for sons the police had taken away. I am angry that they had to struggle for answers while the service of those who held power remains so poorly explained. As a Sikh, I feel shame when defending their reputations receives more care than asking what they did to help.

What we owe the families

The search for truth should not depend on a family having a famous name, money or someone who knows how to reach a court. Honouring Bhai Khalra Ji should mean helping the families whose losses he tried to uncover, as well as remembering his own courage.

A Gurdwara committee or Sikh organisation can name someone a family may approach, set aside money and pay for a lawyer chosen by the family. That lawyer must be free to act without interference from those paying. With the family’s agreement, help should continue after public attention fades. Children may need education and a household may have lost its income. Those needs continue after an anniversary or court decision.

Help must remain available when a complaint concerns the organisation’s own leader or someone with powerful friends. The family should choose its adviser and decide what information may be shared, without fearing that speaking openly will cost it support. Governments still have the duty to protect people and investigate crimes. Our organisations should help families demand it.

Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji’s Saloks return us to the fear and attachment that can guide our choices. Neither the wish to keep a post nor affection for a leader should stop us helping someone in danger. The same responsibility reaches me. Where Sikhs abroad have more freedom to keep evidence safe and ask questions, we should use it for families who have less. Our own suffering must not teach us to blame another community as a whole or refuse protection to its people.

I do not accept his claim that there is nothing he would change. The administration he headed failed these families. That is my judgement from the cases set out here. His later writing has not explained his own response to their pleas. If he asks the people to judge his service, he must put that part of his work before them. I will not assume that families received help simply because a Sikh held the office.

Piara Singh, Harphool Singh, Gurdeep Singh and Swaran Singh were people whose families tried to bring them home. Gurdeep’s note gave his relative a place to look. Someone in authority needed to insist that the police account for him then. The civil inquiry belongs in this history, as does the conviction decades later. Neither removes the question of what those with power did while the men could still be saved. [12]

We cannot bring back the people who were killed. We can work so that a child wearing a patka goes to school and comes home without being targeted for being Sikh. We can stand beside a witness so that telling the truth does not put the family in danger. Remembering the dead must help us do that work. The families who survived should not have to keep carrying that duty for the rest of us.

Related work

Who Holds the Chain (To follow, 26 October 2026)

When a Sikh Home Becomes a Target (To follow, 29 October 2026)

No One Heeded the Dead

Show the Files

Sources

Checked to 25 October 2026. Earlier Gurbani, legal, historical and family-account checks are retained. Additional checks on 25 October read the 2017 High Court account of the Jeobala case, the reported 2023 trial outcome, Dead Silence on Param’s university delegations, and Reduced to Ashes on his position as reported in 2003. Sidhu’s August reference to an inquest was reread: it does not identify the case, date or findings. The inquiry mentioned in the Jeobala court record is not assumed to be his unnamed inquest. The underlying administrative files, full 2023 trial judgment and current appeal record have not been obtained. The invitation to reply is public. The English meanings are learning aids; the argument and its use today are the writer’s.

[1] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Salok Mahalla 9, Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji, Panna 1427, complete Saloks 15–16; heading begins on Panna 1426. Read with the surrounding Saloks and Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s commentary. There is no Rahao in these two Saloks. SriGranth, Panna 1427 · Darpan, Panna 1427.

[2] Supreme Court of India, Prithipal Singh Etc. v. State of Punjab & Anr. Etc., 4 November 2011, Criminal Appeals 523–527 and 528 of 2009, paragraphs 1, 2(I), 30, 36–40 and 49–50. Five life sentences were upheld on differing statutory grounds; this is not a statement that all five were convicted of murder. Paragraph 30 states that none of the higher authorities in the administration helped his wife or disclosed where her husband was; it makes no personal finding against Sidhu. See also Ensaaf, “The Murder of Human Rights Defender Jaswant Singh Khalra”, its account of the case and its legal work. Official judgment · Readable reproduction · Ensaaf case account.

[3] United States Department of State, Country Report on Human Rights Practices 1993: India, 30 January 1994, section 1(a), passages concerning the Kulwant Singh family, the reported withdrawal of an inquiry and Gill’s police leadership. Contemporary reporting, reproduced by Refworld; allegations and reported explanations are not treated as judicial findings. Read report.

[4] District Administration, Amritsar, “List Of Deputy Commissioners”, entry 149, Karanbir Singh Sidhu, 11 May 1992 to 11 August 1996. His public writing supplies the spaced form of his name and his account of service as District Magistrate. Reserve Bank of India, circular RBI/2006-07/099, 3 August 2006, records the creation of Tarn Taran civil district from Amritsar with effect from 16 June 2006. For the earlier separate police command, see the judgment in [2], paragraphs 2(F), 30, 32 and 36, identifying Tarn Taran’s police officers and Senior Superintendent. Official tenure register · RBI circular · Sidhu’s account of his offices.

[5] Police Act, 1861, sections 3–4, government-hosted reproduction, PDF p. 3; Punjab Police Rules, 1934, Volume I, rules 1.15–1.17, PDF pp. 5–6. These texts distinguish state superintendence, professional police command and civil oversight, including limits on internal administration, training and departmental discipline. Police Act · Punjab Police Rules.

[6] Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973, sections 58 and 97, Punjab Police reproduction, PDF pp. 30 and 46–47. The search power depends on reason to believe that confinement amounts to an offence. A requirement to report arrests does not establish that a concealed detention was reported. The later section 176(1A) and current BNSS provisions are not applied retrospectively. Read Code.

[7] KBS Sidhu, “Bhai Jaswant Singh Khalra: A Martyrdom Punjab Must Not Let Fade”, 5 July 2026, especially section V and source note; “On Bhai Khalra, Satluj, and the Weight of Memory: A Free-Wheeling Conversation on JusPunjabiTV”, 12 July 2026, sections on notification, the inquiry, subsequent evidence and his assessment of his tenure. The latter is his written reconstruction of an interview; the spoken interview has not been independently checked here. His public comment of 12 July says documented records govern where memory differs; it is not an undertaking to release files. Authorship and wording were confirmed in the retrieved comment on 24 October 2026; direct browser access was unavailable. His account of his own actions is distinguished from contemporaneous administrative documents, which have not been obtained. 5 July article · 12 July article · Public reply.

[8] KBS Sidhu, “The Bond Before the Crime: The Law, Practice and Politics of Preventive Arrest, Custody and Detention”, 24 October 2026, “Familiar Territory” and “The Magistrate Who Is Also a Police Officer”. Used for his description of earlier experience and independent magisterial judgement, not as a source of powers applicable in 1995. Read article.

[9] KBS Sidhu, “Police Reforms: Autonomy, Accountability and the Fading District Magistrate”, 25 September 2026, especially “Who signs the SHO’s posting order?” His account of a disregarded safeguard is not an admission that he personally authorised particular unlawful appointments. Read article.

[10] KBS Sidhu, “Satluj: History Must Be Told—but Not Without Its Context”, 15 July 2026, sections on Gill, Beant Singh’s government and victims of police abuses. The article contains both the praise examined here and an explicit condemnation of unlawful killings. Read article.

[11] KBS Sidhu, “What’s Wrong With the ‘Satluj’ Film — And How It Will Play Out Politically in Poll-Bound Punjab”, 1 August 2026, sections II and IV: close work with district police chiefs, his description of frequent abductions and killings before February 1994, an inquest whose case, date and findings are not identified, and his comments on Gill; “Satluj and the Many-Sided Truth of Punjab’s Troubled Years”, 1 August 2026, especially its account of everyday fear in Amritsar and its concluding section on justice. These are his retrospective written accounts of interviews, not independently checked recordings or proof of notice of every case. The first article’s inconsistent description of his initial Amritsar posting is not relied on; tenure follows [4]. Its description of Gill as a hero is attributed to other police officers. Film article · Further account.

[12] Human Rights Watch/Asia and Physicians for Human Rights, Dead Silence: The Legacy of Human Rights Abuses in Punjab, May 1994, printed pp. 43–44 (PDF pp. 53–54), “Disappearances in Jeobala”; the contents page lists p. 45. The report abbreviates Piara Singh’s son’s name as H. Singh; the later court record names Harphool Singh. Report and publication date · Full report. Punjab and Haryana High Court, Arjan Singh and others v Central Bureau of Investigation and others, 20 December 2017, paragraphs 32–33 and 35, concerning CRR 4612 and 4736 of 2016. Its pretrial recital of CBI material mentions an inquiry by L.D. Hans, ADC, but supplies no date, ordering authority or established connection to Sidhu. Judgment reproduction. The Tribune, 1 and 6 April 2023, reports the conviction, acquittals, ten-year sentence and trial stay. These are reports of kidnapping and wrongful-confinement convictions, not a murder conviction. The full trial judgment and present appeal position have not been checked. The historical reports do not establish the families’ knowledge in 2026. Conviction report · Sentence report.

[13] Amnesty International, urgent action UA 297/92, ASA 20/49/92, Param Satinderjit Singh, student, 23 September 1992, pp. 1–2: arrest, father’s hunger strike and unanswered June letter. Its appeal recipients include Beant Singh, Gill and police chiefs, not Sidhu; independent evidence of personal notification to him has not been obtained. Original appeal. Dead Silence, printed p. 49 (PDF p. 59), records a fellow student’s account of university delegations, official responses and the failure to obtain access. The police chief’s words are quoted through that report, not an independently inspected transcript. Read report. Reduced to Ashes: The Insurgency and Human Rights in Punjab, South Asia Forum for Human Rights, May 2003, printed p. 52 (PDF p. 73), describes Param as untraced; used for its 2003 account, not as proof of his position in 2026. No later verified outcome was found in the targeted search. Report hosted by Khalra Mission Committee.

[14] Jagdeep Singh Deep, “1993 fake encounter case: CBI court orders 7-year jail for Punjab’s former DIG, life-term to ex-Deputy SP”, The Indian Express, 7 June 2024; Kamaldeep Singh Brar, “A fake encounter in Tarn Taran that refused to die”, The Indian Express, 20 June 2024, including Bobby Kumar’s account; IP Singh, “Hindu family from Tarn Taran wants the world to know Khalra’s story”, The Times of India, 7 July 2026, including Shiva’s account of pending appeals. The trial convictions and family accounts are reported through this journalism; the complete trial judgment and current appeal docket have not been inspected. Dilbagh Singh’s kidnapping conviction is distinguished from Gurbachan Singh’s murder conviction. No evidence that the family approached Sidhu has been established here. Sentencing report · Family’s account · July 2026 report.

[15] National Human Rights Commission, Annual Report 1994–95, paragraphs 4.11 and 4.13, printed pp. 7–8 (PDF pp. 12–13), on district meetings, arrest and detention information, and civilian authority over police. These are the Commission’s recommendations, not newly enacted powers. The report’s exact release date has not been established here; Amnesty’s October 1995 report cites it. Neither source establishes Sidhu’s personal receipt. Official report.

[16] Amnesty International, Determining the Fate of the “Disappeared” in Punjab, ASA 20/28/95, October 1995, sections “The fate of the disappeared” and “Censure of Punjab police by the courts”. It cites the Indian Express, 3 February 1995, on Patti cremations, and a January petition claiming more than 2,000 Amritsar families were awaiting relatives. It also discusses court interventions and the NHRC report. The newspaper and petition have not been independently inspected; these are attributed reports, not proof of every killing or of Sidhu’s personal receipt. Full report reproduced by Refworld.

Anyone named here may reply, and a substantive reply will be published with the article.

Errors will be corrected publicly with a dated note.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

Later, the BBC showed pictures of Sikhs in Britain celebrating. My mother warned that those pictures could make Sikhs in India less safe.

I record her fear without suggesting any link between those celebrations and the pogrom. The killing that followed Indira Gandhi’s death was organised, and responsibility belongs to those who planned, carried out and enabled it. [3, 6]

Then came the reports of killing and burning. I saw images of men with tyres around their necks being set alight. I could not understand how innocent people could be murdered like this while the police and authorities failed to protect them. At the time, I could not imagine it happening in Britain.

In the days that followed, being recognised as Sikh could bring attackers to a family’s door. People leaving for work, children and those at home faced a danger they could not control. Their protection should never have depended on what anyone elsewhere had said or done.

To remember November 1984 properly, we need to understand what happened to families during the killings and how they lived with their losses afterwards.

Giani Zail Singh, then President of India, publicly defended Operation Blue Star, the June 1984 army operation at the Sri Darbar Sahib complex in Amritsar. He also urged Sikhs working for the government, especially soldiers, to remain in their posts. [2, 9]

I examine those decisions, his earlier political actions and what his office did when families asked for protection. I also examine what his press secretary, Tarlochan Singh, did to help those families, and his later defence of the President.

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s Babar Vani, in Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, speaks of the suffering caused by Babar’s invasion. The passage below comes from one of these Shabads, or sacred compositions. On Panna 360, the cries of those being slaughtered are brought before the Creator.

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji says:

ਕਰਤਾ ਤੂੰ ਸਭਨਾ ਕਾ ਸੋਈ ॥
ਜੇ ਸਕਤਾ ਸਕਤੇ ਕਉ ਮਾਰੇ ਤਾ ਮਨਿ ਰੋਸੁ ਨ ਹੋਈ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
ਸਕਤਾ ਸੀਹੁ ਮਾਰੇ ਪੈ ਵਗੈ ਖਸਮੈ ਸਾ ਪੁਰਸਾਈ ॥

Karta toon sabhna ka soee.
Je sakta sakte kau maare ta man ros na hoee. 1. Rahao.
Sakta seehu maare pai vagai khasmai sa pursaaee.

Creator, You care for all. If one powerful person strikes another powerful person, no grievance arises in the minds of those who see it. Rahao. But if a powerful lion falls upon a helpless herd, the question is put to the owner of the herd.

Asa, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Panna 360; Rahao and the opening line of stanza 2, a continuous excerpt from the Shabad. [1]

Panna means page; Rahao marks the verse for pause and reflection, carrying the Shabad’s central thought.

The Shabad addresses the Creator. We should not turn those words into an address to a political ruler. Guru Sahib distinguishes a fight between powerful people from the killing of those who cannot defend themselves. Guru Sahib laments lives ruined and the dead left unattended. At the end, human pride is brought before the Creator’s judgement. Remembering the Creator through Naam, the Creator’s Name, requires us to give up self-importance.

That is the measure I bring to November. If I know someone is being attacked, I must do what I can to help, and I expect the same of any Sikh. This duty extends to anyone in danger and needs no public appointment. A person who can reach ministers, police and army commanders has greater means to obtain protection and greater responsibility for trying.

Those in power had a duty to protect Sikh families. The President had to follow his ministers’ advice and could not command the army however he chose. [10] But he still had to use his position to seek protection for people in danger.

I judge Giani Zail Singh by what he said publicly, what he tried to do and what help reached families. I believe his public defence of the June operation and his office’s response to the November killings failed those families. Tarlochan Singh must answer for his own actions too. Defending the President years later does not explain what he himself did when people were asking to be saved. [3, 9, 11, 13] Families had a right to protection, whatever their political views or understanding of Sikh history.

Nor can the history begin with Indira Gandhi’s death. June’s army action at Sri Darbar Sahib brought deaths within the complex and damage to Sri Akal Takht Sahib, the Sikh seat of authority within it. [2] That suffering shaped how many Sikhs understood November.

What was destroyed

The Nanavati Commission, the government-appointed inquiry that reported in 2005, accepted as broadly correct the Delhi death count established by the Ahuja Committee: 2,733 Sikhs. It also recorded Sikh representative bodies’ claim that the number exceeded 3,000. It described men burned alive, homes attacked, and shops, businesses and taxis looted or set on fire. The killing extended beyond Delhi. [3]

Darshan Kaur told the People’s Union for Democratic Rights what happened to her husband. She was nineteen and had three children when her husband, Ram Singh, was killed. She described the attackers dragging him by his hair, placing a tyre around his neck and setting him alight. The attackers smashed the water pots so that the family could not put out the fire. She never recovered his body. [4]

To me, those broken water pots show what protection had to mean: stopping the attackers while a family could still be saved.

We should let survivors speak about their grief without expecting a story about courage or hope. Praising their courage must not become an excuse to leave them without help.

The familiar image of a man burning with a tyre around his neck cannot stand for everything that happened. Women and children were killed too. The Nanavati Commission records Surinder Singh Kanwar’s account of an attack in Krishna Nagar: his brother, his brother’s wife and their elder son were burned; five children of the family were burned alive. [3]

Madhu Kishwar’s 1984 investigation for the magazine Manushi recorded women and girls dying in burning houses, and women being abducted and raped, including gang rape. It also recorded the pressures that kept sexual violence out of complaints: fear, shame imposed on women, and obstacles to medical examination and recording their accounts. [5] The people and institutions women turned to afterwards could make it harder for them to speak about what had happened. The shame belongs to those who committed and enabled this violence, never to the people who suffered it.

Women tried to protect relatives while their own safety was being destroyed. Some then had to find shelter and keep children alive after losing relatives and livelihoods. [5] We need to remember women as people in their own right, as well as mothers and widows. Children also belong in this history as people whose lives were taken or changed, as well as members of grieving families.

No one should have to speak publicly about sexual violence to receive help. If a survivor chooses to give an account, the survivor should decide how it is kept and shared. We must not use those details simply to shock readers when an anniversary comes around.

The Nanavati Commission found that attacks were organised from 1 November. Outsiders were directed towards Sikh homes, and fuel and other materials were supplied to the attackers. It recorded promises of protection and Sikhs being disarmed before attacks. It also named local leaders and workers of Congress (I), Indira Gandhi’s party, who took part. [3]

In 2018, the Delhi High Court described the mass killings as organised by political figures with help from the police and other bodies responsible for enforcing the law. It said the killings fitted the description of crimes against humanity. [6]

This was a pogrom. Calling it a riot can suggest that two crowds were fighting each other. Here, a community was being hunted. Officials and police did more than fail to arrive in time. The record includes their help in attacking the people they should have protected.

Before Giani Zail Singh became President

Tarlochan Singh’s defence looks back to Zail Singh’s earlier political work. Giani Zail Singh had been Chief Minister of Panjab from 1972 to 1977 and became Union Home Minister in 1980, before taking the Presidency in July 1982. [14]

Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale was a Sikh preacher and head of Damdami Taksal, an institution teaching Gurbani. [26] Writing in October 2022, Tarlochan Singh describes Congress support for candidates associated with Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale against the Akali Dal, the Sikh political party. This was during the 1979 elections for the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC), an elected Sikh body that manages many historic Gurdwaras. [11]

Tarlochan Singh says Sanjay Gandhi, Indira Gandhi’s son, told Congress leaders, including Zail Singh, to help Bhindranwale’s group. He describes money being given to two political organisers to weaken Panjab’s Akali Dal government. [11]

Saying that Zail Singh had no personal contact with Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale does not settle whether he helped the group. Help could be given without a meeting. How far Zail Singh followed Sanjay Gandhi’s instructions remains unclear from this account. [11]

The account does not establish that Congress created Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale’s beliefs or following. I want to examine what Congress wanted to gain by supporting an existing religious movement, and what that cost Panjab. Any support Zail Singh gave must be examined, even though those supported later acted independently and he moved to higher office.

T.V. Rajeswar, who headed the Intelligence Bureau during these years, describes rivalry between Zail Singh and Panjab Chief Minister Darbara Singh. He recalls warning Indira Gandhi about interference in negotiations. He also reports claims that Congress encouraged Bhindranwale. But he does not treat every claim as proved. He treats one claim about Zail Singh passing on information as guesswork. He says another report of interference was investigated and rejected. [16] The dated notes he recalls, and any replies to them, should be made available so these accounts can be checked.

The President and Tarlochan Singh

Tarlochan Singh’s ability to obtain help also needs to be judged against the access he describes having. He worked in public relations and tourism in Panjab, then helped with publicity for the Asian Games. He served as Giani Zail Singh’s press secretary from 1983 to 1987. [11]

In his June 2022 article, Tarlochan Singh recalls an incident from Zail Singh’s years as Home Minister, before Tarlochan Singh became presidential press secretary. Zail Singh asked Paramjit Singh, the Chief Secretary of Panjab, to invite Sant Harchand Singh Longowal, the Akali Dal president, to Delhi. Tarlochan Singh says that Darbara Singh, Panjab’s Chief Minister, blocked the invitation. Zail Singh told Tarlochan Singh about this.

Tarlochan Singh then contacted Ravi Inder Singh, a former Speaker of the Panjab Assembly, who telephoned Paramjit Singh about the invitation. [11] On this account, Tarlochan Singh could contact senior officials and follow up Zail Singh’s request.

Tarlochan Singh also describes his work after the June 1984 attack. He says he was accused of telling journalists about the damage at Sri Darbar Sahib and was forced to take leave. He was later asked to help with talks involving Indira Gandhi, her son Rajiv Gandhi and Sikh religious officeholders. Tarlochan Singh says he helped bring the Sikh officeholders to Sri Darbar Sahib and passed their proposals to Delhi. [11]

The writer and journalist Khushwant Singh later praised Tarlochan Singh for persuading the Jathedars, senior Sikh religious officeholders, that the President had not been told beforehand about the June operation. In the same account, Khushwant Singh criticised the President’s response to the November killings. [15] That praise does not tell us what Tarlochan Singh did to help families facing the killings.

Tarlochan Singh also argues that Indira Gandhi had been reluctant to confront Sikhs. He points to concessions she had made and Sikhs she had appointed to public office. Those earlier decisions do not tell us what she intended in June 1984. His own account says she later reversed an announced settlement that included reopening Sri Darbar Sahib, lifting curfew and releasing most of those arrested. [11] Her advisers must answer for their own actions, and she remained responsible for her decisions.

Giani Zail Singh after the June attack

In his October 2022 article, Tarlochan Singh says that Zail Singh was kept out of Panjab and Sikh affairs after becoming President and had “no role to play at any point of time”. [11] The evidence below tests that claim.

B.D. Pande was Panjab’s Governor during the June attack. Pande’s memoir says that the President pressed for government officials to be moved to different posts in 1983–84. Some requests came through an unnamed official. Pande wrote from memory, without papers to check his recollections against. [7] If Pande’s recollection is right, the President was trying to influence some decisions about Panjab’s administration.

Pande’s account of 8 June describes houses that were still smouldering, funeral pyres seen from the air, and bodies in the water at Sri Darbar Sahib. Pande also recalls the President’s visit, saying that Zail Singh was distressed and blamed the Panjab administration. [7] Pande’s account leaves unclear which of those scenes the President personally saw. Pande headed the administration the President blamed. I must examine Pande’s own responsibility as well as his account of the visit.

India News, a bulletin published by the Indian High Commission in Ottawa, reported on 15 June that the President was pleased with the army’s restraint and was directing repair work. [8] This government account shows how his visit was presented. It cannot, on its own, establish the army’s restraint.

Repairing Sri Akal Takht Sahib could not answer the families’ questions. They still needed to know what had happened to people trapped in the complex, who had died and who was responsible.

After the June attack, some Sikh soldiers mutinied. At Ramgarh, mutineers killed their commander, Brigadier Puri. A news report from the time also describes soldiers in Sri Ganganagar, in Rajasthan, moving towards Panjab’s border. [17] This was the situation when the President spoke to the country.

The President broadcast on 17 June, nine days after his visit to Sri Darbar Sahib. The 1984 book Agony of Punjab reproduced the English text. The Reuters news agency reported the next day that the President had defended the operation. [9]

In the printed English text, the President describes the traditions at Sri Akal Takht Sahib as having been shattered. The broadcast then quotes Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s lament, in which Guru Sahib asks the Creator whether the cries of people suffering such slaughter aroused no compassion. It moves from that lament to the lines about the powerful fighting one another and a lion falling on “a flock of sheep”.

In the Shabad, the line translated above as “Creator, You care for all” comes after the lament and before the line about the powerful fighting the powerful. It is the first line of the Rahao. That line is missing from the printed broadcast. I do not know why it was omitted. [1, 9]

Immediately after the quotation, the printed broadcast says: “When no other alternative was left, then the Punjab government had to send the security forces.” [9]

The quoted lines still address the Creator, and the President did not say that the state was the Creator. Yet he included them in his defence of the military action. These lines bring the suffering of the helpless before the Creator, so quoting them cannot establish that the operation was right. The Shabad sets the standard by which the operation must be judged: what happened to people who could not defend themselves, and what decisions put them in danger. The armed men in the complex included members of Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale’s group. Naming those men and listing their weapons could not by itself answer those questions.

The President also criticised calls for Sikhs working for the government, especially soldiers, to leave their posts. The broadcast says, “Religion, in other words, means duty”, and describes failure to honour an oath taken in Guru Sahib’s name as “cowardice and being led astray”. [9] The President was using Guru Sahib’s name to urge Sikhs to remain in government service. That did not explain what a Sikh should do when the government’s actions conflicted with a Sikh’s conscience.

The President had also taken an oath. Under Article 60, he had promised to protect the Constitution and law, to serve India’s people and to work for their well-being. [10] The Constitution limited his powers, but his oath still required him to serve the people. November would test how he used those powers when Sikh families needed protection.

The broadcast also expressed sorrow, criticised Panjab’s administration and promised an investigation into the damage. [9]

The evidence examined here does not show that Tarlochan Singh wrote the broadcast. Nor does it show that either man planned the June attack or organised the November killings. Tarlochan Singh’s June 2022 article records an hour-long meeting between Indira Gandhi and the President after the attack. [11] On that account, the President could speak directly to the Prime Minister after the attack, whatever he had been told beforehand. He still had to explain why he publicly defended the operation.

Khushwant Singh recalled that, after the June attack, Zail Singh asked whether resigning would serve any purpose. Khushwant Singh replied that the Sikh community would still hold the President responsible. [12] UPI reported on 27 September 1984 that Zail Singh said, “I am deeply distressed over these tragic happenings”, and apologised for the assault on Sri Darbar Sahib. [12] I consider that apology together with his June defence of the operation and his continued service as President until 1987. [9, 14]

Appeals to the presidential office in November

In November, I wondered why the President of India had not ordered protection. I did not see him on television pressing for it. But the Constitution limited what he could decide for himself. Article 74 required him to follow his ministers’ advice. He could require them to consider it again, but then had to follow the advice they gave afterwards.

Under Article 78, he could require the Prime Minister to give him information. He could also require the Council of Ministers to consider a minister’s decision if the Council had not already considered it. As a Union territory, Delhi was administered through Lieutenant Governor P.G. Gavai under Article 239. [3, 10] Article 56 allowed the President to resign. [10]

These rules do not show that he used every power and every means of influence available to him. The records checked do not show that ministers told him not to take a particular step to protect people, that he required them to reconsider, or that they refused after reconsidering.

The writer Patwant Singh told the Nanavati Commission that a delegation visited the President on the morning of 1 November and urged him to fulfil his moral and constitutional duty to stop the violence. According to Patwant Singh, the President said he lacked the power to intervene. [3]

The group included three senior retired Sikh officers of the armed forces: Lieutenant General J.S. Aurora, whose name is printed Arora in the Commission report, Air Chief Marshal Arjan Singh and Brigadier Sukhjit Singh. The former ambassador Gurbachan Singh was also with them. I.K. Gujral, who later became Prime Minister, also told the Commission that he joined the group and left disappointed. [3]

Patwant Singh says the group asked the President to speak forcefully to the Prime Minister. The President initially proposed doing so in three or four days. When challenged about the bloodshed, he agreed to speak that afternoon. Patwant Singh says the President did not make the requested radio and television appeal or act on the request to speak to the Chief Ministers then in Delhi. Asked about calling the army, the President said he was not in contact with Home Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao and suggested that Aurora speak to Rao. [3] This concerns an unanswered request for an urgent public appeal; it does not establish that the President never expressed sorrow in November.

I cannot accept a proposal to wait three or four days before speaking to the Prime Minister while people were being killed. The limits on his powers did not make the families’ need less urgent. Vijay Kumar Malhotra, a Delhi leader of the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP), then an opposition party, also said the President told him he was helpless. Sharad Yadav, visiting with fellow opposition leaders Charan Singh and Karpoori Thakur, described the President as mostly silent and apparently helpless. [3]

In his statement to the Commission, Malhotra said the President telephoned him to ask for help for people who had appealed for protection. The President also asked other members of that opposition party to help. Malhotra said workers were sent. [13] This is evidence of an attempt to help families. It leaves open what protection reached them and what the President obtained from the government responsible for their safety.

Congress was in power, and Zail Singh had been a senior Congress politician before becoming President. [14, 24] Why was he asking an opposition party to arrange protection that the government had a duty to provide? The reported appeals do not establish what protection he obtained from the Congress government. Requests to opposition workers could not replace action by the government responsible for the police.

Madan Lal Khurana, a BJP leader in Delhi, records another intervention in his affidavit. [3, 21] On 3 November, the President asked him to help recover the body of Mr Virdi, whom the President described as his relative. Khurana approached the police, but says they refused to release the body because they had orders against handing bodies to relatives. They supplied the time and place of cremation so the family could attend. [21]

Other bereaved families deserved the same urgency. They too needed help recovering bodies, finding missing relatives and obtaining answers from the police. The refusal to release bodies also required a response from those with the authority to challenge it.

Khushwant Singh told the Nanavati Commission that he telephoned the presidential office for help. A secretary said the President could not come to the telephone. Khushwant Singh was advised to seek shelter in a Hindu household. The Commission’s summary does not name the secretary or give the precise date of the call. [3]

Tarlochan Singh gave his own account in a statement dated 12 December 2001. He described his car being attacked on 31 October and emergency calls received by him and Kulwant Singh, the President’s Private Secretary. Tarlochan Singh said the President at first doubted the reports and asked for more information. [13]

His account of 1 November goes further. At about 3.30 in the afternoon, he says, he and others could see a mob attacking Gurdwara Rakab Ganj Sahib from Rashtrapati Bhavan, the President’s official residence. They heard “shrieks and shouts” which he understood as people calling for help. He says the President also saw and heard the attack. Tarlochan Singh later learned that two Sikhs had been burnt alive there. Tarlochan Singh describes the President as “very much depressed” because he “could do nothing”. [13]

The journalist and oral historian Harpal Singh, himself a survivor of the pogrom, included an interview with Tarlochan Singh in his 2021 Columbia University MA thesis, 1984: Sikh Genocide. Recalling the attack on Gurdwara Rakab Ganj Sahib and screams reaching Rashtrapati Bhavan, Tarlochan Singh said: “But we couldn’t do a thing except sitting around.” [19]

In both accounts, the cries of people facing a mob reached Rashtrapati Bhavan. It makes me angry, and as a Sikh I feel shame that Sikhs in power failed to protect them. Those people needed help from men who could reach the ministers and officials responsible for sending it. Their rescue should have been the most urgent task in that house.

Tarlochan Singh says a security officer had told him that the President’s police escort drove away a mob attacking the President’s car the previous day. [13] Did he ask for protection and medical help to be sent to the Gurdwara? Did he ask whether he or another official could reach it with a security escort? If such requests were refused, who refused them and what did he try next? What help did he obtain for survivors afterwards?

Tarlochan Singh acknowledged that Khushwant Singh asked him for help. [13] This does not identify Tarlochan Singh as the unnamed secretary in Khushwant Singh’s separate account.

On his own published account, I judge that he did not do enough for the people appealing to him. Passing requests to the President did not fulfil his own responsibility as a human being and as a Sikh.

According to Tarlochan Singh, the President telephoned Lieutenant Governor Gavai on 31 October and again on 1 November, suggested army assistance if needed, and complained to ministers at Teen Murti House, where Indira Gandhi’s body lay in state. [3, 13] Tarlochan Singh also said that Arjan Singh and Aurora urged the use of the army to prevent further violence. The President replied that the Government of India had to issue the orders. [13]

Home Minister Rao’s reply says that Rajiv Gandhi was sworn in as Prime Minister at Rashtrapati Bhavan on 31 October. [3] Appointing a Prime Minister under Article 75 was a separate power. [10] Pranab Mukherjee, then India’s Finance Minister and later President, places the ceremony in Ashoka Hall at 6.45 p.m. in his memoir. [23] The Nanavati Commission records assaults on Sikh passers-by from about 2.30 p.m. and the stoning of the President’s entourage at about 5 p.m. near AIIMS, the All India Institute of Medical Sciences hospital, where Indira Gandhi had been taken. Attacks on Sikhs had therefore begun before the swearing-in. The Commission describes the nature and intensity of the attacks as changing from the morning of 1 November, when the violence became systematic and organised. [3]

Tarlochan Singh’s statement describes his own car being attacked before he reached Rashtrapati Bhavan. It dates the stream of emergency calls to him and Kulwant Singh to 7.30–8 p.m., after the ceremony. [13] The statement does not establish that the President and Tarlochan Singh already knew everything those later callers told them. But the President’s entourage and his press secretary had already been attacked.

The new Prime Minister was in the President’s own residence that evening. In Harpal Singh’s interview, Tarlochan Singh says the President asked Rajiv Gandhi to include Buta Singh in the Cabinet to answer criticism that Rajiv was anti-Sikh. [19] Mukherjee gives a different account of the suggestion. [23] On Tarlochan Singh’s account, the President could discuss Cabinet membership directly with Rajiv Gandhi. What protection did the President ask Rajiv Gandhi to arrange for Sikh families already under attack?

Tarlochan Singh describes later failed attempts to reach the Prime Minister by telephone, followed by complaints in person at Teen Murti House the next morning. [3, 13]

In The Khalistan Conspiracy, G.B.S. Sidhu, a former senior intelligence officer, writes that K.C. Singh told him about another request for the President’s help. K.C. Singh was a deputy secretary at Rashtrapati Bhavan in 1984. He recalled that Rao asked the President to help a businessman he knew, Manmohan Singh (a different person from Dr Manmohan Singh, the later Prime Minister), on the evening of 1 November. The businessman was at a farmhouse in South Delhi. According to this account, the President ordered guards to collect him and take him somewhere safe. [20]

The account does not tell us whether the guards brought him to safety or why the Home Minister asked the President for help. If it is accurate, the President gave an order to try to rescue someone. What similar help did he seek for families who could not reach the Home Minister? Helping one person with powerful contacts could not fulfil his responsibility towards everyone else.

The Commission material I have checked does not independently confirm the calls and complaints Tarlochan Singh described seventeen years later. That does not mean they did not happen. Gavai’s explanation to the Commission does not mention a call from the President. Rao denied that he had failed to take steps to speak to the President, but he did not confirm this particular account. [3, 13]

The journalist Kuldip Nayar reported the President’s later explanation that official papers and information had been kept from him, so he had relied on friends and outsiders. [3] That does not explain what happened to the appeals for help that reached his office.

The Commission found no delay or indifference on Home Minister Rao’s part. It held Delhi’s Lieutenant Governor, Gavai, and Police Commissioner S.C. Tandon responsible for the failure to maintain law and order. It made no finding on the presidential office. Its findings therefore do not settle the questions about the President’s conduct. [3]

Zail Singh remained President until July 1987. [14] I believe an honourable response would have been to resign and tell the country what he knew, what protection he had sought and why he could no longer continue. Resigning could not undo the June destruction or remove his responsibility for publicly defending the operation. If he chose to remain, he owed the public an account of what protection his office obtained and what it did to hold those responsible to account.

Tarlochan Singh also remained in service until 1987. [11] His account of being forced to take leave after the June attack does not answer the questions about his actions in November or his later service. His job differed from the President’s, but he too must explain why he remained, what help he obtained for families and what he did to hold those responsible to account. I expect a Sikh in such a position to be prepared to lose it for trying to save lives. If he could not obtain protection, he should have resigned and publicly explained what he had tried and why protection had failed.

Sikh families were left unprotected despite a Sikh President and Sikh officials in positions of power.

Public honours and responsibility

Tarlochan Singh received the Padma Bhushan, one of India’s highest civilian honours, for Public Affairs in 2021. The British Sikh Association honoured him at a House of Lords dinner in 2025. Its report says he received the Sikh Jewel Award, records praise from parliamentarians and describes him as a “global Sikh icon”. The report also records his condemnation of the attack on Sri Darbar Sahib. [14] His condemnation of the attack belongs in the record alongside his 2022 defence of Giani Zail Singh, who publicly defended the operation. [9, 11]

Tarlochan Singh did later raise these killings in public. On 14 December 2009, he called attention in the Rajya Sabha to relief for survivors and punishment of those responsible. In a 2014 interview and at a 2015 book launch, he described the President’s failed attempts to reach Rajiv Gandhi. [25] My question is what he himself did to obtain protection and help while serving in the presidential office from 1984 to 1987, and how his later recollections fit with his 2001 evidence. [13]

When I read of these honours, I think of the families who had asked someone to save them. I cannot put a public figure’s reputation ahead of their unanswered questions. Readers who rely on Tarlochan Singh as an authority on Sikh history deserve the full record of his role, including the President’s public actions and his own, and what his defence leaves out.

What concerns me is what future generations will inherit as history. In twenty, thirty or forty years, a researcher may use Tarlochan Singh’s later accounts without seeing the evidence that challenges them. I feel I must publish that evidence now, so that it is there for those who come after us.

I have put these questions to Tarlochan Singh in writing. If he replies, his reply will be published with this article.

The duty to pursue justice

Giani Zail Singh remained President until July 1987. The Misra Commission investigated the killings while he was still in office. [3, 14] What evidence did the presidential office give that inquiry, and what action did he seek against those accused? Having remained in office, he owed the families sustained efforts to secure investigations and bring perpetrators before the courts. The accounts examined here do not explain how he fulfilled that responsibility. His distress at the killings cannot answer what he did afterwards to help obtain justice.

Tarlochan Singh has his own account to give. Between November 1984 and the end of 2000, what did he do to help bring the perpetrators to justice? He knew that Sikh families had appealed to Rashtrapati Bhavan to save them. His responsibility did not end when he passed on those appeals, or when he left the presidential office in 1987. Families still needed help collecting evidence, finding lawyers and giving testimony without being threatened. [11, 13]

In the sources I have checked, I have not found an identifiable case from those sixteen years in which his intervention helped pursue the perpetrators. [27] He should identify the evidence he supplied to inquiries, the complaints he pressed the authorities to investigate and the families or witnesses he helped through criminal proceedings. He should explain what he did when officials refused to act. If he undertook this work, he should put it before the families, with dates and records wherever possible. If he did not, he must explain why.

For me, leaving these years unexplained is a serious black mark against his public record. These were years of the survivors’ lives, spent seeking justice for people they had lost. I cannot accept an account of distinguished service that leaves unanswered what he did to help them pursue those responsible. His later demands for justice cannot answer for those sixteen years. He must account for his own conduct during them.

The years after the killing

The duty to help did not end when the attacks stopped. The writer Ajeet Cour describes trying to obtain more accommodation, toilets and medical help for displaced families. She asked Dr Harbans Singh Wasir, the President’s physician, to approach the President. Additional accommodation and sanitation were provided, although she could not say whose intervention secured them. She credits Wasir with sending an ambulance and doctors. [22]

These were people driven from their own homes in India’s capital. They needed safe accommodation, food, sanitation, medical treatment and help finding missing relatives. Assistance should not have depended on knowing someone who could reach the President’s physician. I expected the President and his staff to press the government to organise help for all affected families. They should have checked where help was missing and kept pressing until it arrived. The help Cour describes mattered. Her account does not show that the President and his staff did that wider work.

I have not found a verified account of either man visiting bereaved families soon after the killings, comforting them or following up their need for practical help. Such work would help defend their conduct, so I would expect them to describe it. The accounts examined here do not. On the evidence of the appeals and the response described here, I judge that both men failed the families who needed them.

If anyone has a dated report, photograph or first-hand account of such a visit or practical support, I ask them to send it so that I can examine it and correct the record where necessary.

After the killings, families had to find money for food, housing and school while caring for children without the people on whom they had depended. Compensation could not replace those they had lost. Children who escaped physical injury could still lose years of schooling.

Santok Singh was two and a half years old when his father and grandfather were killed. His mother disguised him in girls’ clothes to help him escape. In an account published by the People’s Union for Democratic Rights in 2025, he described being bullied, leaving school and working in insecure jobs. Having lost his own education, he had helped his son pursue a Master’s degree in music. [4]

Survivors also had to pursue those who had destroyed their families. Darshan Kaur described later threats and attacks as she sought justice. [4] Witnesses had to describe the killings repeatedly while still facing intimidation. Justice delayed for decades takes years from the people to whom it is owed.

Children learn about public life when those accused of destroying their families seem better protected than the families themselves. When people are attacked for being Sikh and institutions promising equality fail to provide justice, children have reason to doubt whether those promises include them. Governments and Sikh leaders must answer for these failures. Families need protection, education and practical help.

A family’s survival does not mean the harm has been put right. A mother’s extraordinary work raising children after murder does not lessen the responsibility of those who caused the loss, or remove anyone else’s duty to help.

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji brings ruined lives before the Creator and calls human pride to account. I judge Sikh holders of office by that standard. My real worry is the future. I want our children to see this responsibility lived out by those who lead them. When innocent Sikh lives are next threatened, Sikh leaders must put their protection before the security of their own positions.

For Darshan Kaur, the history includes a husband whose body was never recovered. For Santok Singh, it includes the education he lost and his work to help his son pursue a Master’s degree in music. [4] We must take those losses into account when judging the people who held office. Our children need to know that we can respect a Sikh officeholder and still examine what that person did. However respected a leader may be, these families are still owed answers.

Related work

The Guru’s House, Under Whose Control?

Who Holds the Chain (26 October 2026)

The Duty to Find Out (To follow): a separate essay examining civil administration and policing in Panjab in the 1990s, including the authority of Karan Bir Singh Sidhu (KBS Sidhu), Amritsar’s Deputy Commissioner from 1992 to 1996, and what families needed for protection.

Sources

The English meaning of Gurbani is a plain-language rendering informed by Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan. The opening is personal recollection.

Checked to 26 October 2026. Checks recorded on 21, 22 and 23 October are retained. Focused checks on 26 October covered the escort and call chronology [13], Cabinet, rescue and relief accounts [19, 20, 21, 22, 23], later parliamentary and press statements [25], constitutional provisions [10], the opposition-party and Congress context [3, 14, 24], and the added identifications. The plain-English revisions are not fresh checks of the other sources; individual entries record the passages consulted and access limits.

[1] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Asa, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Panna 360. The quotation is the Rahao and opening line of stanza 2, not the complete Shabad, which ends ॥੩॥੫॥੩੯॥. SriGranth · SearchGurbani · Guru Granth Darpan.

[2] Government of India, White Paper on Punjab Agitation, 10 July 1984, printed pp. 49–51, sections 27 and 32; Annexure XI, p. 169. The government’s account acknowledges army fire on Sri Akal Takht Sahib and deaths in the complex. Its casualty table combines civilians and those it labels terrorists; it cannot establish a devotees-only or civilian-only toll. Government explanations of necessity or restraint require attribution. Scanned White Paper. The brief explanation of the sites was checked against the SGPC’s descriptions on 22 October 2026: Sri Akal Takht Sahib · Guide to the complex. The operation’s name and month are also identified in the UK Foreign Secretary’s parliamentary statement of 4 February 2014; used here only for the operation’s name and month. Statement.

[3] Justice Nanavati Commission, Report, Volume I (2005): geographical scope, p. 1; death count, pp. 3 and 17; Krishna Nagar, pp. 81–82; Patwant Singh, pp. 123–125; Khushwant Singh, pp. 125–126; Tarlochan Singh, p. 132; Malhotra, pp. 132–133; Sharad Yadav, p. 133; Gujral, pp. 133–134; Kuldip Nayar (printed as Kuldeep Nayyar), pp. 137–138; Gavai’s explanation, pp. 171–173; Rao’s explanation and the Commission’s assessment, pp. 175–178; organised attacks and limits of the leadership finding, pp. 179–183; Khurana’s opposition role, p. 126. At p. 182 the Commission did not find evidence implicating Rajiv Gandhi or other senior Congress (I) leaders in proposing or organising the attacks. That conclusion is reported as the Commission’s, not adopted as a complete account of their conduct. The three military officers are identified as retired in Aurora’s affidavit, read as an online reproduction. The report prints his name as Arora; the affidavit uses J.S. Aurora. The spelling difference was checked on 23 October 2026. Report scan · Searchable reproduction · Affidavit of J.S. Aurora.

[4] People’s Union for Democratic Rights, Delhi 1984: The Long Aftermath (2025), Darshan Kaur, pp. 21–22; Santok Singh, Annexure 4, p. 42. These are survivor accounts collected by the organisation. Report.

[5] Madhu Kishwar, “Gangster Rule: The Massacre of the Sikhs”, Manushi, No. 25, November–December 1984, pp. 10–32; women’s experiences and barriers to reporting sexual violence, especially pp. 13–17. Contemporary field investigation and testimony. Scan · Publisher’s reproduction.

[6] Delhi High Court, State through CBI v. Sajjan Kumar and Others, 17 December 2018, paragraph 367.1, printed p. 191. Judgment.

[7] B.D. Pande, In the Service of Free India: Memoir of a Civil Servant, edited by Ratna M. Sudarshan (Speaking Tiger, 2021), Chapters 12 and 14; Introduction and Preface. Read as an online text reproduction. The Panjab chapters were written in April–May 1986 from memory without retained notes or records; the editor did not substantively verify them. The unnamed messenger carrying posting requests is not identified as Tarlochan Singh. The authorised Rediff excerpt confirms the visit and criticism but omits the detailed scene. Authorised excerpt · Publisher.

[8] High Commission of India, Ottawa, India News, No. 12/84, 15 June 1984, account of the presidential visit. Read as an online transcription of a government bulletin, not independent verification of its claims about the army. Bulletin transcription.

[9] Giani Zail Singh’s 17 June 1984 broadcast, reproduced as “Sanctity of Religion in Secular India”, Agony of Punjab (Patriot Publishers, 1984), Appendix I, pp. 181–186; selections and justification, p. 183; oath and continued service, p. 184. Book scan. The comparison concerns this contemporary printed English reproduction. Original audio and an official typescript have not been checked; no intention behind the omission is asserted. Reuters, The Globe and Mail, 18 June 1984, independently reported the broadcast and the President’s defence of the operation; available here as a transcription. Reuters report.

[10] The Constitution of India, Articles 53, 56, 60, 74, 75, 78 and 239. The earlier official 2024 English–Malayalam edition is retained. The additional 26 October check used the official edition current to 1 May 2026, including amendment footnotes: binding ministerial advice operated from 3 January 1977 and the reconsideration proviso from 20 June 1979. The later Article 239AA arrangement is not applied to 1984. Earlier official text · Additional official text.

[11] Tarlochan Singh, “1984 Punjab Tragedy: Unanswered Questions?”, 30 June 2022, and “Giani Zail Singh and Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale: An Overview”, 7 October 2022; his own later accounts. The June article describes leave followed by renewed negotiations, without establishing a formal reinstatement date. His career page lists presidential press-secretary service in 1983–1987. The October defence’s context is exclusion from Panjab affairs and official information, not a denial that the broadcast occurred. Accuracy checks of the two articles are recorded in [18]. June article · October article · Career account.

[12] Khushwant Singh, Truth, Love and a Little Malice, authorised extract published by Scroll, 6 June 2015, recalling the resignation conversation. UPI, “President apologizes for assault on temple”, 27 September 1984. The UPI account and short quotation were read in full. Memoir extract · UPI archive.

[13] Nanavati Commission statements reproduced by Discover Sikhism: Tarlochan Singh, W-134, 12 December 2001; Vijay Kumar Malhotra, W-140, 10 January 2002. Read as reproductions, not independently inspected signed originals. The Rakab Ganj passage, including the cries for help and the description of the President, was reread on 22 October 2026. The account of his feelings and inability to act is Tarlochan Singh’s, not an independent finding. The 26 October rereading also checked his report of the presidential police escort driving away a mob on 31 October. His authority over that escort and the time of the two deaths relative to his observation have not been established. Tarlochan Singh · Malhotra.

[14] President of India, official profile: Chief Minister of Panjab, 1972–1977; Union Home Minister from 1980; President, 25 July 1982 to 25 July 1987. Government of India, Padma Awards 2021; British Sikh Association, 2025 dinner report. The association’s account is a written report, not an independently verified transcript of speeches. The honours are also examined in Who Holds the Chain (26 October 2026). Presidential profile · Award list · Association’s report.

[15] Khushwant Singh, “Minority-bashing”, reprinted in S. Tarlochan Singh: A Historic Journey, edited by Dr Prabhleen Singh (2023), printed p. 37, credited to Hindustan Times; “Tarlochan’s Help”, p. 40. Later praise supplies no summons date or original document of the claimed intervention. The Indian Express’s archive of its 27 September 1984 coverage reports a tankhaiya declaration, holding the President accountable for religious wrongdoing, on 2 September and subsequent clearance. The relation between these proceedings and Khushwant Singh’s account has not been established. The essay therefore does not claim Tarlochan Singh prevented every declaration or determine his part in the clearance. Book listed on Tarlochan Singh’s site · PDF linked from Tarlochan Singh’s own website · Contemporary coverage recalled by Indian Express.

[16] T.V. Rajeswar, India: The Crucial Years, publisher’s extract, HarperCollins India, 30 October 2015; recollections of rivalry and warnings to Indira Gandhi in 1981–1982. The publisher’s extract could not be opened on 22 or 23 October 2026; the earlier reading is retained.

[17] United Press International, “Mutiny by Sikhs in Indian army”, Toronto Sun, 11 June 1984, read as an online transcription. The report describes the killing of Brigadier Puri at Ramgarh and a separate movement towards Panjab’s border from Sri Ganganagar. UPI’s archive item of the same date also mentions Ganganagar in indexed excerpts checked on 23 October 2026. UPI archive · Newspaper report transcription. Its location in Rajasthan is identified by the Rajasthan Foundation’s Sri Ganganagar profile.

[18] Tarlochan Singh’s June 2022 article gives eight deaths in the Mehta police firing, against eleven in his October article; no resolution of that toll is asserted here. His October article dates the Sikh–Nirankari clash to 19 April 1978 and gives both April 1981 and April 1980 for Gurbachan Singh’s killing. Delhi High Court, Ranjit Singh v. State, 3 October 1997, paragraph 22, records 13 April 1978 and 24 April 1980 respectively. These are source discrepancies, kept in the notes rather than used to settle the wider argument. June article · October article · Judgment.

[19] Harpal Singh, 1984: Sikh Genocide, MA thesis in Oral History, Columbia University, 26 August 2021, pp. 120–123, particularly pp. 122–123. Published interview excerpt; the original recording and complete interview have not been independently checked. Thesis · Columbia’s biographical account. For the differing Cabinet recollection, see [23].

[20] G.B.S. Sidhu, The Khalistan Conspiracy (2020), chapter 12, PDF pp. 193–194. The guards account recounts K.C. Singh’s later recollection. The deployment and outcome have not been independently established. Book. The book expressly distinguishes the businessman from the later Prime Minister. Sidhu’s former intelligence role is identified in his publisher’s biography.

[21] Madan Lal Khurana, affidavit before the Nanavati Commission, paragraphs 5–7, reproduced by Discover Sikhism. The signed original has not been inspected. Affidavit.

[22] Ajeet Cour, “Punjabi writer Ajeet Cour recalls the Black November of 1984”, The Tribune, 27 October 2024. Later personal account, originally written for private circulation in 2014 and translated by Satjit Wadva. Account.

[23] Pranab Mukherjee, The Turbulent Years (2016), participant’s memoir extract, Hindustan Times, 28 January 2016, passage identifying the time and place of Rajiv Gandhi’s swearing-in. Memoir extract. An additional authorised extract, published by Scroll on 1 February 2016, credits Mukherjee himself with recommending Buta Singh and describes the pre-oath ministerial choices. This differs from the attribution and sequence in Tarlochan Singh’s interview in [19]; neither is treated as a complete record of the conversation. Authorised memoir extract. His Finance Ministry and later Presidency are recorded in the official biography.

[24] Election Commission of India, Statistical Report on General Elections, 1980 to the Seventh Lok Sabha, Volume I, List of Successful Candidates, printed p. 77, Punjab, Hoshiarpur: Zail Singh, INC(I). The party entry was read in the indexed text of the government-hosted report; the full PDF was not inspected in this check. Read with the official career record in [14]. Government-hosted report.

[25] Rajya Sabha, Official Report, 14 December 2009, printed p. 208 and Tarlochan Singh’s speech, pp. 211–218, on relief and punishment of those responsible. Official proceedings. Manoj C.G., Rajiv Gandhi didn’t take calls from President after 1984 riots broke out, The Indian Express, 30 January 2014, direct interview report. 2014 report. Sanjay Suri, 1984 riots: When silence spoke so unmistakably, IANS, published by Business Standard, 14 July 2015, account of remarks at his book launch. 2015 account. The latter two report later recollections; the complete recordings have not been independently checked. Failed telephone calls do not contradict the subsequent in-person complaints described in [13].

[26] Punjabi University, The Encyclopaedia of Sikhism, entry Jarnail Singh Bhindranvale, Sant (1947–1984), describes his preaching and appointment as head of Damdami Taksal in August 1977. Encyclopaedia entry. The institution’s own description supports the brief explanation of its teaching purpose.

[27] Focused search on 26 October 2026 for Tarlochan Singh’s personal work on investigations and prosecutions between November 1984 and 31 December 2000. Read with his career account [11] and reproduced testimony [13]. Nanavati Commission, Volume II, Annexure VI, entry 134, dates his testimony to 12 December 2001; Annexure VII lists him among witnesses who had not filed affidavits with that commission. This does not establish what he submitted to earlier inquiries. The targeted public searches did not identify a verified case of his assistance to a prosecution within the period. Presidential files, complete earlier-inquiry submission records and every relevant case file have not been examined. The finding is limited to the sources checked. Official Volume II.

Questions about Tarlochan Singh’s work in 1984 were put to him in writing on 21 October 2026, with a reply date of 27 October. His reply, if any, will be published here with a dated note. Specific corrections from any reader are also welcome.

Errors will be corrected publicly with a dated note.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

The interview was published by Punjab First Voice on 30 October 2026. Journalist Pankaj Kapahi speaks with Harvinder Singh Phoolka, a senior lawyer who has helped families take their cases to court. Readers can hear Bibi Darshan Kaur from about 41 minutes 50 seconds. This summary follows the Panjabi captions, the written words shown with the video. It has not been checked word for word against the speech. [1]

Watch the interview

India’s Prime Minister, Indira Gandhi, was killed on 31 October 1984. In the days that followed, crowds of attackers targeted Sikh families in Delhi and other parts of India. People were killed, homes were burned and families had to flee. Government records list 3,325 people killed, including 2,733 in Delhi. [2] The loss continued in the years afterwards, as families tried to rebuild their lives and bring the killers to court.

Phoolka also recalls how Hindu neighbours and friends helped him and his pregnant wife escape. [1] Their help belongs in this history too. A person’s religion does not tell us whether that person helped, harmed people or turned away. We have to find out what each person did.

Here in Britain, poppies are worn in November to remember those who died in war. The Royal British Legion links that remembrance with care for people still living. [3] That makes me think about what we do after our own remembrance gatherings. Who keeps in touch with a family once the speeches are over? Who helps when a court case becomes difficult or a child needs support?

Listening to the Guru

These accounts bring me to Guru Sahib’s teaching about fear and the way we treat other people.

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib says:

ਭੈ ਕਾਹੂ ਕਉ ਦੇਤ ਨਹਿ ਨਹਿ ਭੈ ਮਾਨਤ ਆਨ ॥

ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਸੁਨਿ ਰੇ ਮਨਾ ਗਿਆਨੀ ਤਾਹਿ ਬਖਾਨਿ ॥੧੬॥

Simple reading: Bhai kaahoo kau det nahi, nahi bhai maanat aan.

Kahu Nanak sun re manaa, giaanee taahi bakhaan.

Plain meaning: One who frightens no one and fears no one else: Nanak says, listen, O mind, call that person spiritually wise.

Reference: Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Salok Mahalla 9, Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib, Panna 1427. Complete Salok 16, read with the nearby Saloks. Mahalla 9 means the Ninth Guru. Panna means page; a Salok is a verse. [4]

Guru Sahib speaks of wisdom in our life with the Creator. The nearby Saloks describe a person who remembers the Creator, is free from greed and pride, and is not led by praise or blame. These words ask me to look at my own choices. Fear of losing someone’s friendship or praise must not stop me asking what happened to a family who needed help.

I apply that teaching to people with power too. It asks something of the person able to help. A family under attack needs protection; it does not need us to judge its fear. The person in office should keep trying to get help, even when speaking up may cost a job or the approval of powerful friends.

Who we remember in Ardas

Ardas is our prayer. Its closing words ask for sarbat da bhala, the good of everyone, as the Creator wills. We can bring the needs of the day into Ardas while keeping its fixed opening and closing words the same. [5]

When we bring those needs into Ardas, I want us to remember the innocent people killed in 1984 and in Panjab during the 1990s. We should remember those who were hurt, whose homes were destroyed, who had to flee and who never found out what happened to someone they loved. Their lives matter even when their names are missing from a book or a list.

The good of all reaches beyond Sikhs. It includes the Muslim families attacked in Gujarat in 2002. [6] It includes innocent people killed, hurt or driven from their homes in Israel and Gaza, in Sudan and other parts of Africa, and anywhere else in the world. We can ask for care for those who are hurt and for strength to help them, whatever their faith or country.

Remembering our own losses should help us hear other people’s pain. We must still find out who did each wrong and who failed to protect people. To care for people, we must be willing to tell the truth about what happened to them.

The questions that remain

We must also ask what people with power did to help. In 1984, Giani Zail Singh was President of India and Tarlochan Singh was his press secretary, who dealt with the news media. Families’ calls for help reached their office. Tarlochan Singh’s statement to the Nanavati Commission, which looked into the killings, describes those calls and the President’s efforts to get help. [7] The families have the right to ask what help reached them and what was tried next when those efforts failed.

I examine what both men did in a separate essay, When a Sikh Home Becomes a Target, to be published on Monday, 2 November. I sent Tarlochan Singh written questions on 21 October, asking for a reply by 27 October. As of 31 October, I have received no reply. Any reply will be published in full with that essay.

The people who planned and carried out the killings must answer for their crimes. Anyone who hid crimes or blocked justice must answer for what they did too. Those who failed to use their position to help must explain their choices. We should be clear about what each person did, and correct what we have written if new evidence shows it is wrong.

Help that lasts

Sikhs already remember through Ardas, gatherings and the work of families and others who seek justice. We can build on that work. A Gurdwara or another Sikh group can agree, with a family, to keep helping after the yearly gathering. That may mean paying for a lawyer, helping a witness get to court or supporting a child’s education. The family should choose its lawyer and decide what personal details may be shared.

A person should not have to speak on a stage or agree with a group’s leaders to receive help. Nor should help stop when a complaint is about someone with powerful friends. Every government has the duty to keep people safe and find out who committed crimes. Our help should make it easier for families to demand that their government does this work.

We can also keep records safe for the future. A person who lived through an attack should decide whether to tell a story and how it may be used. We should listen with care and avoid making someone repeat painful details just to hold an audience’s attention.

Guru Sahib’s words return me to the fear that can keep us quiet and the harm we can do to others. I cannot care more about someone’s good name than about a family asking what happened to a person they loved. When we remember this November, I hope our Ardas will help us carry that care into our lives. Bibi Darshan Kaur and other families should not have to carry the search for truth alone.

Related work

Who Holds the Chain?

Read Who Holds the Chain?

No One Heeded the Dead

Read No One Heeded the Dead

When a Sikh Home Becomes a Target. To follow, Monday, 2 November 2026.

The Duty to Find Out. To follow.

Sources

Checked to 31 October 2026. The interview captions, Gurbani at SriGranth and in Darpan, and the British remembrance page were checked on 31 October. New checks that day covered Ardas and the Gujarat report. The earlier 26 October check of Tarlochan Singh’s statement for the forthcoming essay is retained; the statement was also read again on 31 October. The English meaning is a learning aid informed by Darpan. The application is the writer’s.

[1] Punjab First Voice, Pankaj Kapahi’s interview with Harvinder Singh Phoolka, 30 October 2026. Darshan Kaur: approximately 41:50–49:21; her husband is mentioned at 46:16. Phoolka’s escape: 26:25–36:36. These summaries follow the displayed Panjabi captions, not a full translation checked against the audio.

Watch the interview

[2] Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, Financial assistance to anti-Sikh riot victims, Press Information Bureau, 1 March 2016. Official recorded death figures. Checked 31 October 2026.

Government recorded death figures

[3] Royal British Legion, About Remembrance, on remembering those who died and caring for the living. Its work centres on the Armed Forces community.

Royal British Legion on remembrance

[4] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Salok Mahalla 9, Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib, Panna 1427, complete Salok 16, with the surrounding Saloks and Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan. Darpan explains the line as neither frightening others nor being frightened by them.

SriGranth, Panna 1427

Darpan, Panna 1427

[5] SGPC, Sikh Rehat Maryada, Panjabi edition, printed pages 10 and 12; English edition, Article IV(3)(a), printed page 21, note 3, and page 23, note 1. These identify the protected opening and closing words and the place for the purpose of a gathering. The proposed remembrance here is the writer’s application of that provision.

Sikh Rehat Maryada, pages 10 and 12

English Sikh Rehat Maryada, Article IV(3)(a)

[6] Human Rights Watch, We Have No Orders To Save You, April 2002, on attacks against Muslims in Gujarat and the destruction of homes and livelihoods. No casualty estimate is used here.

Human Rights Watch report on Gujarat

[7] Tarlochan Singh, statement before the Nanavati Commission, witness 134, 12 December 2001, reproduced by Discover Sikhism. It records two telephone calls from the President to Delhi’s Lieutenant Governor, on the night of 31 October and the morning of 1 November. The signed original was not inspected.

Read the reproduced statement

Anyone named here may reply, and a substantive reply will be published with the article.

Errors will be corrected publicly with a dated note.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu

PanthSeva

London

Suppose a Buddhist organisation told Hindus they could keep their religion but were Buddhist culturally and nationally because of India’s Buddhist past. Would the RSS accept that? It should explain whether it would accept those terms before asking Sikhs to accept its own.

I begin with the Guru. In Sidh Gosht, Guru Nanak Sahib’s conversation with the Siddhas, these followers of yoga ask about the Guru and the life of a disciple, or learner.

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

Guru Nanak Sahib answers:

ਸਬਦੁ ਗੁਰੂ ਸੁਰਤਿ ਧੁਨਿ ਚੇਲਾ ॥

Shabad guroo, surat dhun chelaa.

Plain meaning: The Shabad is my Guru. My attention, lovingly fixed on the Shabad, is the disciple.

Ramkali, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib, Sidh Gosht, pauri 44, Panna 943. Pauri means a numbered verse; Panna means page. One-line excerpt, read with pauri 43 on Panna 942 and all of pauri 44. [5]

The rest of the pauri speaks of freedom from attachment and the ending of haumai, the habit of putting “I” and “mine” first. It is not a statement about nationality. For me, the answer means that the Guru guides how I understand and live my life. I cannot put the RSS in that place. The same teaching asks me to look at my own pride. [5]

Sikhs have had to answer this claim for a long time. Bhai Kahn Singh Ji Nabha’s Ham Hindu Nahin, or We Are Not Hindus, appeared in Gurmukhi in 1898. Our refusal of the Hindu name did not begin with the RSS’s statement in 2001. [6]

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar made the distinction between religion and wider identity in his 1923 book Hindutva. He wrote: “Let the Sikhs be classed as Sikhs religiously; but as Hindus racially, nationally and culturally.” He kept Sikh for religion, but used Hindu for race, nation and culture. Savarkar did not found the RSS, but his words show why keeping our religious name does not settle the matter. [7]

Before the January 2001 statement, RSS chief K.S. Sudarshan had caused controversy by describing Sikhi as a “panth of Hinduism”, meaning a path within Hinduism. On 16 January, RSS representatives met the National Commission for Minorities, whose job is to protect minority rights. Afterwards, spokesman M.G. Vaidya said: “We regard Sikhism as a separate religion with a distinct ideology.” He also denied that the RSS intended to erase Sikh identity. But, as The Times of India reported the next day, he still placed Sikhs, Muslims and Christians within a wider Hindu society. He made both statements at the same press conference. [2]

The RSS’s website gives the same wider meaning to Hindu. Its 2012 explanation of Hindu Rashtra, or Hindu nation, includes Sikhs and Buddhists regardless of their religion. Its June 2017 questions and answers state: “The RSS perceives Hindu as a term that defines the national identity of the people living in this country.” [1]

In Ludhiana on 26 February 2026, RSS chief Mohan Bhagwat called Sikhi a “separate and distinct religion” while describing Hinduism as a “way of life”, rather than a religion. [2]

I can follow that distinction without accepting it. Hindu names our neighbours’ religion; the RSS also uses it for India’s people who follow other faiths. Calling this wider meaning cultural or national does not explain why Sikhs should take the name. Bharatiya means Indian. If Indian is what the RSS means, why insist on Hindu?

India’s Buddhist past gives us a way to put that question back to the RSS. Ashoka ruled much of the subcontinent about 2,300 years ago. His inscriptions affirm his commitment to the Buddha, the Dhamma and the Sangha. Dhamma here is the teaching, and Sangha is the Buddhist community. Other inscriptions urge respect between people of different faiths. His Buddhist commitment did not mean that all his subjects were Buddhist. [4]

When India chose its flag in 1947, it took the wheel from the stone base beneath the lions on Ashoka’s Sarnath capital. Jawaharlal Nehru connected Ashoka with ancient culture, peace and goodwill. He also said the flag had no communal significance. People of different faiths could share that inheritance. [3]

Now let an imagined Buddhist organisation make the same assurances the RSS makes, with the identities reversed:

Imagined declaration, not a real statement: We recognise Hinduism as a separate religion. Hindus may keep their beliefs, worship and customs. But culturally and nationally, we regard them as Buddhist. Ashoka and India’s Buddhist inheritance belong to them too. We use Buddhist here for a wider civilisation and way of life, not merely a religion. We have no wish to erase Hindu identity.

Would the RSS accept that name for Hindus? A Hindu could respect Ashoka, value Buddhist teachings and honour India’s flag without agreeing that Hindu culture or national identity was Buddhist. I would defend that refusal. I would not ask Hindus to deny a shared past before accepting their answer.

Hindus could point to their own traditions and understanding of who they are. They could say they had never agreed to the Buddhist name. Sikhs who reject the Hindu name raise those same objections. If the RSS would accept them from Hindus, it must explain why they carry less weight when Sikhs make them. The same test must apply to both communities.

The imagined organisation might insist that Buddhist meant a generous and inclusive way of life, that Hindu worship would continue and that no one was being asked to convert. Hindus would still be receiving a name they had not chosen. Calling it a way of life would not answer someone who rejected it. The organisation could say Indian, but chooses Buddhist, just as the RSS chooses Hindu.

The RSS already includes Buddhists within its Hindu name and may offer that answer here. [1] But then we are back where we started: it has chosen a name broad enough to cover both communities and expects us to accept it. The RSS cannot make Sikhs Hindu by choosing to call them Hindu.

Culture includes how we live with one another, our language, food, family habits and understanding of our responsibilities. People of different faiths can share much of that life. The Guru’s teaching guides a Sikh’s work, food, family life and treatment of others. I cannot accept an arrangement in which we keep a Sikh religious name while the RSS takes authority to name our culture Hindu. What we share with our neighbours does not give it that authority.

On 27 October 2026, The Tribune returned to the 2001 statement while also recording the continuing claim of wider Hindu cultural unity. S. Tarlochan Singh Ji, then Vice-Chairman of the National Commission for Minorities, took part in the 2001 meeting with RSS representatives. [2] I want a clear answer from him about what changed and what did not. Repeating that our religion is recognised does not answer why the wider Hindu name is still being applied to us. Sikh leaders discussing this with the RSS should put that question to it and obtain an answer in writing.

The wheel can remain on India’s flag without requiring Hindus to call their culture Buddhist. I ask the RSS to apply that same fairness to Sikhs. Will it say in writing that it will stop calling Sikhs Hindu when it speaks of India’s people and culture? We remain Sikhs under the Guru; the RSS does not decide that for us.

Related work

The Foreign Ideas Inside Hindutva

Ham Hindu Nahin: What It Still Means

Which “Hindu” Do You Mean?

Sources

Checked to 28 October 2026. The RSS pages, the January 2001 report, the flag proceedings, Ashoka’s edicts and Panna 943 with Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan were checked on 28 October 2026. Vaidya’s and Bhagwat’s statements were checked against the cited reports on 28 October 2026. The 27 October Tribune report was read on that date. The check of Savarkar’s printed page recorded on 27 October is retained; a fresh visual comparison is not claimed. The English meaning of Gurbani is a learning aid guided by Darpan. Its application to the argument is mine. The imagined Buddhist declaration is a test of the RSS’s reasoning, not an actual statement by a Buddhist organisation.

[1] RSS, Why Hindu Rashtra?, 22 October 2012, section “Hindu: National of Bharat”; Basic FAQ on RSS, 3 June 2017, section on Hindu national identity. The FAQ quotation is a complete sentence. 2012 explanation · 2017 FAQ.

[2] The Times of India, “Sikhism a separate religion, agrees RSS”, 17 January 2001, reporting the meeting’s participants, Vaidya’s 16 January statement and the wider Hindu-society claim. Aditi Tandon, The Tribune, “When RSS first acknowledged Sikhism as a separate religion with a distinct ideology”, 27 October 2026, on the 2001 talks involving Tarlochan Singh Ji and the continuing cultural claim. Tarsem Singh Deogan, Hindustan Times, “Sikhism a separate religion, says RSS chief Bhagwat”, 27 February 2026, reports both parts of Bhagwat’s statement at Ludhiana the previous day. These are newspaper accounts; an original signed 2001 agreement has not been inspected for this revision. 2001 report · 2026 report · Hindustan Times, 27 February 2026.

[3] Constituent Assembly Debates, 22 July 1947, “Resolution re National Flag”. PDF p. 1 specifies the wheel from the abacus of Ashoka’s Sarnath Lion Capital. Nehru’s explanation on PDF pp. 4–5 addresses the flag’s meaning and Ashoka; he expressly rejects a communal meaning. Parliamentary record.

[4] Ashoka’s edicts, English rendering by S. Dhammika, 1994: Minor Rock Edict I and the Bairat/Bhabru inscription, numbered III in this collection, for Buddhist commitment; Major Rock Edict XII for respect between religious communities. These inscriptions do not establish that everyone under Ashoka became Buddhist or that India’s whole culture was Buddhist. Edict translations.

[5] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib, Ramkali, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib, Sidh Gosht, pauri 44, Panna 943; read with pauri 43, Panna 942, and the composition’s Rahao on Panna 938. Professor Sahib Singh Ji, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Darpan. One-line excerpt; the political application is not its plain meaning. SriGranth · Darpan.

[6] Dharam Singh, “Ham Hindu Nahin”, The Encyclopaedia of Sikhism, Punjabi University. Sheena Pall, “The Issues of Sikh Identity: Sanatanist–Sikh Debate”, Journal of Punjab Studies 20(1&2), 2013, pp. 193–216, at p. 196, dates the Devanagari edition to 1897 and the Gurmukhi edition a year later. Punjabi University · Pall.

[7] Vinayak Damodar Savarkar, writing as “A Maratha”, Hindutva, May 1923, printed p. 113, read with pp. 110–113; PDF p. 60. The original includes “nationally”. The printed-page check recorded on 27 October is retained. Original scan.

Anyone named here may reply, and a reply addressing the argument will be published with the article. Errors will be corrected publicly with a dated note.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

The people around a leader play a part too. We are quick to praise people we regard as being in our camp and to look past their failings. Our admiration can protect the conduct we should be questioning.

Malar ki Vaar, a composition in Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, helps us see the problem more clearly. Guru Nanak Sahib Ji describes trained creatures trapping their own kind, then rulers preying on people through their officials. The Salok, or verse, also tells us what true learning requires.

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji says:

ਹਰਣਾਂ ਬਾਜਾਂ ਤੈ ਸਿਕਦਾਰਾਂ ਏਨੑਾ ਪੜੑਿਆ ਨਾਉ ॥
ਫਾਂਧੀ ਲਗੀ ਜਾਤਿ ਫਹਾਇਨਿ ਅਗੈ ਨਾਹੀ ਥਾਉ ॥
ਸੋ ਪੜਿਆ ਸੋ ਪੰਡਿਤੁ ਬੀਨਾ ਜਿਨੑੀ ਕਮਾਣਾ ਨਾਉ ॥
ਪਹਿਲੋ ਦੇ ਜੜ ਅੰਦਰਿ ਜੰਮੈ ਤਾ ਉਪਰਿ ਹੋਵੈ ਛਾਂਉ ॥
ਰਾਜੇ ਸੀਹ ਮੁਕਦਮ ਕੁਤੇ ॥
ਜਾਇ ਜਗਾਇਨੑਿ ਬੈਠੇ ਸੁਤੇ ॥
ਚਾਕਰ ਨਹਦਾ ਪਾਇਨੑਿ ਘਾਉ ॥
ਰਤੁ ਪਿਤੁ ਕੁਤਿਹੋ ਚਟਿ ਜਾਹੁ ॥
ਜਿਥੈ ਜੀਆਂ ਹੋਸੀ ਸਾਰ ॥
ਨਕੀਂ ਵਢੀਂ ਲਾਇਤਬਾਰ ॥੨॥

Simple reading: harnaan baajaan tai sikdaaraan enhaa parhiaa naau.
faandhee lagee jaat fahaain agai naahee thaau.
so parhiaa so pandit beenaa jinhee kamaanaa naau.
pahilo de jarh andar jammai taa upar hovai chhaau.
raaje seeh mukadam kute.
jaai jagaain baithe sute.
chaakar nahdaa paain ghaau.
rat pit kutiho chat jaahu.
jithai jeeaan hosee saar.
nakeen vadheen laaitbaar.

Plain meaning: Deer, falcons and officials are called trained. They trap their own kind in the snare; in the Master’s presence they find no acceptance. Those who have practised Naam are truly learned and discerning scholars. First the root takes hold within the ground; then shade appears above. Rulers are lions and their officials dogs. They go and rouse those sitting or asleep. The servants are the rulers’ claws that inflict wounds; through these dogs the rulers lick up the people’s blood and bile. Where beings are judged, these untrustworthy ones stand disgraced, as though their noses had been cut.

Reference: Malar ki Vaar, Salok Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Panna 1288. Complete ten-line Salok, numbered 2, immediately before pauri 22. The plain meaning follows Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan on the officials as claws and the rulers acting through them. Panna means page. [1]

These officials use their skills to help rulers harm people. They know the people’s language and understand their lives. That knowledge helps the ruler reach them. The warning matters to us when a Sikh holds office: sharing our name or background gives us no protection if he uses that position against Sikhs.

The root must grow before the tree can give shade. In the same way, Naam, the Creator’s Name, must take root within us. The Salok calls those who practise Naam truly learned. The following pauri, a section of the Vaar, turns us towards reverence for the Creator through the Guru and the peace found in Naam. [1]

That warning makes me examine how governments and Sikh leaders exercise power over our Gurdwaras. Freeing our Gurdwaras from government control is part of our responsibility. We must also consider how we live and whom we serve.

Office and approval

We can see the problem in the way our Gurdwaras are run. Sikh voters have had no general election to the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) since 2011. This body manages many historic Gurdwaras. Its executive committee appoints and removes the Jathedars who lead the three Takhts, seats of Sikh authority, in Panjab. Separately, the government appoints the Chief Commissioner, Gurdwara Elections, who sets the election timetable and polling date. Sikh voters depend on that process to elect a new SGPC. [2]

At Takht Sri Hazur Sahib, Maharashtra’s 2015 law gives the state government power to choose the management board’s president from among its members. [3]

A person may accept a post believing he can help. If he says his position gives him influence, he should explain whom he has helped, what he has challenged and what happened when he spoke up. Staying close to powerful people cannot become the purpose of holding the post.

Speaking up may cost a leader the approval he wants to keep. Guru Angad Sahib Ji’s Salok at Panna 1290 warns that worldly honours make us forget Naam, yet none goes with us when we die. We need to ask what praise and position are making us forget. [4]

The sangat’s part

The sangat, the Sikh congregation, helps decide whom people trust. We invite someone to speak, praise his work and urge others to listen to him. When we defend someone because he is “ours”, while condemning the same conduct in an opponent, we put our group above the truth.

Being welcomed by an important person can make us feel important too. We may defend him because criticism threatens our place beside him.

This does not put equal blame on everyone. A person threatened into silence, shut out of decisions or denied a fresh vote has fewer choices than someone who holds office or speaks for an influential organisation. The more a person knows, and the more power he has, the more he must answer for what he does. Where we can speak, we should help those asking fair questions, even when the answers may trouble people we admire.

Tarlochan Singh’s record

Consider the public praise for Tarlochan Singh, a former Member of Parliament. He served as Press Secretary to Giani Zail Singh, who was President of India from 1982 to 1987. At the British Sikh Association’s 2011 dinner, an honorary doctorate from the World Sikh University was accepted on his behalf. In 2025, the association honoured him at the House of Lords with its Sikh Jewel Award and called him a “global Sikh icon”. He had received India’s Padma Bhushan in 2021. The association also reports that he condemned the June 1984 army attack on Sri Darbar Sahib in Amritsar. [5, 6]

Government records list 3,325 people killed across India in the anti-Sikh pogroms of October–November 1984, including 2,733 in Delhi. [9] Tarlochan Singh told the Nanavati Commission that he received appeals for protection and passed them to the President. His statement also describes seeing and hearing the attack on Gurdwara Rakab Ganj Sahib from Rashtrapati Bhavan, the President’s official residence. [9] On his own published account, I judge that he did not do enough for those appealing to him. Passing messages to the President did not end his own responsibility to seek protection.

In his 2022 defence of Giani Zail Singh, Tarlochan Singh says the President was kept out of Panjab affairs and denied information. Yet the President publicly defended the June 1984 army operation and invoked Guru Sahib’s name to urge Sikhs to remain in government service. Tarlochan Singh’s defence must account for those choices too. [6] An oath taken in Guru Sahib’s name cannot stand above Guru Sahib’s teaching.

After the Godhra train fire in 2002, Muslim communities in Gujarat were attacked. Gujarat’s Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) state government was then led by Chief Minister Narendra Modi. Tarlochan Singh was then Vice-Chairman of the National Commission for Minorities and served as Chairman from 2003 to 2006. The Commission’s duties include looking into complaints that minorities’ rights have been violated. In April 2002 he reported that the Commission had summoned Gujarat officials for answers. In June 2003 he was reported as saying the Commission was satisfied with what the government had done, citing compensation for deaths and injuries and other aid. [10]

In ANI’s August 2025 account, he said: “Delhi is sponsored, Gujarat is natural”, adding: “No government role, not even one person.” In that account, he presents the 1984 killings in Delhi as organised and the 2002 violence in Gujarat as spontaneous. [10]

India’s central government, using figures from Gujarat’s government, told Parliament in May 2005 that 1,044 people were killed and 2,548 injured in the violence after the Godhra train burning. Homes and businesses were destroyed. India’s National Human Rights Commission found a comprehensive failure by the state government to protect people’s rights. Human Rights Watch reported planned attacks on Muslims involving police and state officials. In 2010, a UN committee on women’s rights described torture and sexual violence against women and girls, and criticised failures to hold police officers accountable for participation in the violence, refusal of assistance and obstruction of justice. [11]

In 2005, discussing 1984, Tarlochan Singh said: “Make the police answerable if they fail to control a riot.” [12] Does his denial include the state government’s failure to protect people? How does he answer the reports of police and officials taking part in the attacks? In my judgement, such a blanket denial fails the people whose rights his commission existed to defend. The same concern for people facing violence must govern what he says about Delhi and Gujarat.

An organisation that presents someone as a person the Sikh community should trust must examine serious questions about his record. A family asking what an official did when protection was needed deserves more than a list of honours. A true mark of a leader is whether he stands up for people and their rights when it is unpopular and may cost him.

When a Sikh Home Becomes a Target, on 29 October, will examine what Giani Zail Singh and Tarlochan Singh did when families asked for protection, and what they did afterwards to help survivors obtain justice. I put these questions to Tarlochan Singh in writing on 21 October. Any reply will be published alongside the essays, with a dated update where necessary.

The Master we serve

Bhagat Kabir Ji gives the image of the dog another meaning:

ਕਬੀਰ ਕੂਕਰੁ ਰਾਮ ਕੋ ਮੁਤੀਆ ਮੇਰੋ ਨਾਉ ॥
ਗਲੇ ਹਮਾਰੇ ਜੇਵਰੀ ਜਹ ਖਿੰਚੈ ਤਹ ਜਾਉ ॥੭੪॥

Simple reading: kabeer kookar raam ko muteeaa mero naau.
gale hamaare jevree jah khinchai tah jaau.

Plain meaning: Kabir, I am Ram’s dog; Moti is my name. A rope is around my neck; wherever He draws me, I go.

Reference: Saloks of Bhagat Kabir Ji, Panna 1368, complete Salok 74. Ram names the Creator here; Moti is the affectionate name explained in Darpan. [8]

Bhagat Kabir Ji expresses love and willing surrender to the One. That brings the question home to me too. I value the encouragement I receive for PanthSeva. I must remain willing to question someone whose praise matters to me, and to accept a sound correction from someone who disagrees with me. Otherwise, approval has begun deciding what I will say.

The sangat can ask a leader who appointed him, what he agreed to do, what he will refuse to do and how people can question or replace him. We should compare his answers with what he actually does. A complaint about someone powerful should receive the same serious hearing as a complaint about someone with no connections.

The family seeking protection, the witness asking to be heard and the reader seeking the truth must matter more than protecting a reputation. Our praise should encourage people who meet those responsibilities. When we use it to shield them from fair questions, we have helped hold the chain.

Related work

The Guru’s House, Under Whose Control?
Read article

When a Sikh Home Becomes a Target: The President and the Sikh household. To follow, 29 October 2026.

The Duty to Find Out. To follow, 2 November 2026. This separate essay examines civil administration and policing in Panjab, including Karan Bir Singh Sidhu’s duties as Amritsar’s Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate. [7]

Sources

Checked to 26 October 2026. Checks recorded on 15, 20, 21 and 23 October are retained, including the printed presidential broadcast and the Gurmukhi comparison with Dekho Ji. Focused checks on 26 October covered the Gurbani units and Darpan commentary, SGPC election and appointment sources, the Hazur Sahib nomination provision, Tarlochan Singh’s reproduced testimony and Gujarat statements, the government’s 1984 death count and the Gujarat human-rights findings. A contemporary PTI report was also checked against the Gujarat death and injury figures. No fresh visual comparison of the printed presidential broadcast or parliamentary page is claimed. Individual retrieval limits are recorded below.

Plain-English meanings are learning aids informed by Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan. The argument and present-day applications are the writer’s.

[1] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Malar ki Vaar, Salok Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Panna 1288: complete second Salok before pauri 22, read with that pauri. SriGranth and Darpan; Gurmukhi compared with Dekho Ji. The closing nasal signs are displayed in standard Unicode as ਨਕੀਂ ਵਢੀਂ, as in Dekho Ji.
SriGranth, Panna 1288
Darpan, Panna 1288
Dekho Ji, Panna 1288

[2] Ministry of Home Affairs, Lok Sabha Unstarred Question 4143, answered 19 August 2025, pp. 1–2. It identifies the Chief Commissioner, Gurdwara Elections as the authority fixing election stages, “including the date on which polling shall be held”. The answer also reports High Court challenges to electoral rolls and related matters, and a stay. It gives no case number, date or precise scope for that stay. This is the government’s August 2025 account. Charanjit Singh Teja, “Sikh outfits urge Amit Shah to expedite SGPC elections”, The Tribune, 10 October 2026. SGPC, “SGPC announces budget session on March 28; key decisions taken on Jathedar appointments”, 7 March 2025.
Read source
Read source
Read source

[3] Nanded Sikh Gurudwara Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib (Amendment) Act, 2015, Maharashtra Act XVI of 2015, section 3 substituting section 11(1). Gazette, 17 April 2015, provision for nomination of the president from among board members.
Read source

[4] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Malar ki Vaar, Salok Mahalla 2, Guru Angad Sahib Ji, Panna 1290, complete two-line Salok before pauri 26; discussed through paraphrase.
SriGranth, Panna 1290
Darpan, Panna 1290

[5] British Sikh Association, “British Sikh Association Dinner held at House of Lords in honour of Padma Bhushan Sardar Tarlochan Singh”, 2025 event report, and its annual dinner report for 14 November 2011. The earlier honorary doctorate was awarded by World Sikh University at the association’s dinner and accepted by Dr Mandeep Lamba on his behalf. These are the association’s written reports, not independently verified transcripts of the speeches. Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, “Padma Awards 2021 announced”, Press Information Bureau, 25 January 2021, Padma Bhushan list, Tarlochan Singh, Public Affairs, Haryana. For his earlier posts, see Hardev Singh Virk, “Book Review: Sardar Tarlochan Singh: A historic Journey”, SikhNet, 17 December 2023, passages on his presidential service and Rajya Sabha membership.
2025 dinner report
2011 dinner report
Read source
Read source

[6] Tarlochan Singh, “Giani Zail Singh and Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindranwale: An Overview”, SikhNet, 7 October 2022, concluding account of the Presidency. Giani Zail Singh, “Sanctity of Religion in Secular India”, broadcast of 17 June 1984, reproduced in V. D. Chopra, R. K. Mishra and Nirmal Singh, Agony of Punjab (New Delhi: Patriot Publishers, 1984), Appendix I, pp. 181–186 (book scan): defence of sending security forces, p. 183; appeals to leave government posts and the oath in the Guru’s name, p. 184. The broadcast was checked as a contemporary printed English reproduction; original audio and an official typescript were not checked. Reuters reported the broadcast and its defence of the operation on 18 June 1984; the linked copy is a transcription. For the presidential term, see the President’s Secretariat, “Giani Zail Singh”.
2022 article
Reuters report
Presidential profile

[7] District Administration, Amritsar, “List Of Deputy Commissioners”, entry 149, 11 May 1992 to 11 August 1996. For his roles as Deputy Commissioner and District Magistrate, and his public name, see his interview in Devinder Pal Singh, “Bridging Governance and Spirituality: The Journey of KBS Sidhu”, SikhNet, 1 August 2025, section I.
Read source
Read source

[8] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Saloks of Bhagat Kabir Ji, Panna 1368, complete Salok 74. SriGranth with Darpan, compared with Dekho Ji.
SriGranth, Panna 1368
Dekho Ji, Panna 1368

[9] Government of India, Ministry of Home Affairs, “Financial assistance to anti-Sikh riot victims”, Press Information Bureau, 1 March 2016, recording 3,325 deaths across India, including 2,733 in Delhi. Government death-count source. Tarlochan Singh, testimony before the Nanavati Commission, witness 134, dated 12 December 2001, reproduced by Discover Sikhism. Read as a reproduction, not an independently inspected signed original. It records his account of receiving appeals for protection and conveying them to the President; it does not establish what protection ultimately reached each family.
Read reproduced testimony

[10] National Commission for Minorities, official functions; Tarlochan Singh’s own biography, recording Vice-Chairmanship in 2000–2003 and Chairmanship in 2003–2006. PTI, “Minorities commission summons top Gujarat officials”, 1 April 2002. The Times of India, “Minorities unhappy with NCM chief’s sermons”, 8 June 2003, reporting his satisfaction with government action after meeting Modi, alongside his references to compensation for deaths and injuries and other aid. ANI, written interview account, 27 August 2025, reproduced by The News Mill. Quotations follow that written account; the complete spoken interview has not been independently checked. His claimed inquiry and booklet have not been obtained. The report’s account of his chairmanship dates conflicts with the chronology above and is not relied upon here.
Commission’s functions · His biography · PTI report · 2003 report · ANI written account

[11] Rajya Sabha, Unstarred Question 5209, “Persons killed in Gujarat riots”, answered 11 May 2005, printed p. 149. The reply attributes the figures to Gujarat’s government; the recorded deaths comprise 790 Muslims and 254 Hindus. These are official recorded figures, not an agreed final toll. Complete indexed official text was retrieved; the legacy link redirects, and the separately hosted copy could not be opened during the 21 October 2026 check. PTI, “Gujarat riots killed 254 Hindus, 790 Muslims”, 11 May 2005, also reports the government’s figures of 1,044 deaths and 2,548 injuries; this contemporary report was checked on 26 October 2026. NHRC, proceedings of 31 May 2002, finding comprehensive state-government failure to protect rights. Human Rights Watch, “We Have No Orders To Save You”, April 2002, Summary, reporting planned attacks, police participation, cooperation with state officials and destruction of homes and businesses. UN Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Women, CEDAW/C/IND/CO/SP.1, 3 November 2010, paragraphs 5, 15 and 19(b), on torture and sexual violence against women and girls, police participation, refusal of assistance and obstruction of justice. The latter are the committee’s findings and recommendations.
Official parliamentary record · Copy of parliamentary reply · Contemporary PTI report · NHRC proceedings · Human Rights Watch report · Official UN committee text

[12] Parsa Venkateshwar Rao Jr, “Minorities unhappy with riot report”, Gulf News, 15 August 2005, direct interview about the Nanavati report, police accountability and rehabilitation. His quoted principle concerns accountability after communal violence; it is not a previous finding by him about the Gujarat government’s role.
Read interview

Errors will be corrected in this essay with a public, dated note. Anyone named here may reply to the points made, and the reply will be published alongside this essay.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

The writer says Bhagat Sain Ji offered Aarti to Ramanand, a human teacher, and calls Bhagat Sain Ji a committed Vaishnav, a devotee of the Hindu god Vishnu. Professor Sahib Singh Ji records and answers this claim in Darpan, his commentary on Gurbani. The note does not give the writer’s name.

But answering the writer means understanding what we sing. Bhagat means devotee, and this prayer is a Shabad, a composition in Gurbani. It opens with incense, lamps and ghee, or clarified butter. In the next line, Bhagat Sain Ji offers himself to the Creator. I follow Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s explanation that giving oneself is the Aarti.

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

Panna means page. A stanza is a numbered group of lines. Dhanasari is the raag, or musical measure, for this Shabad.

Bhagat Sain Ji says:

ਧੂਪ ਦੀਪ ਘ੍ਰਿਤ ਸਾਜਿ ਆਰਤੀ ॥
ਵਾਰਨੇ ਜਾਉ ਕਮਲਾ ਪਤੀ ॥੧॥

Simple reading: Dhoop deep ghrit saaj aartee.
Vaarane jaau kamalaa patee.

Plain meaning, following Darpan’s interpretation: O Master of Kamala, I am a sacrifice to You. This self-offering is my Aarti, my offering of incense, lamps and ghee.

Reference: Dhanasari, Bhagat Sain Ji, Panna 695. Complete stanza 1; read with the Rahao and all four stanzas. “This self-offering” is added in English to show how Darpan explains the two lines together.

Kamala is a name of Lakshmi, the Hindu goddess. Professor Sahib Singh Ji takes “Master of Kamala” here as a name for the Creator. If you open the SriGranth website, Dr Sant Singh Khalsa’s English translation describes incense, lamps and ghee prepared for Aarti and also says “I am a sacrifice”. Professor Sahib Singh Ji joins the two lines: giving oneself to the Creator is the Aarti. The SriGranth translation does not explain them in that way.

In Darpan’s reading, the next stanza names the Creator as the finest lamp and the pure wick. The Rahao, the pause carrying the Shabad’s main thought, speaks of joy through the Creator’s grace, His help and blessing. At the end, Bhagat Sain Ji asks the mind to remember the One who carries us beyond fear. The whole prayer turns to the Creator in this way, and that is why I follow Darpan’s explanation. Readers should be able to ask whether Darpan’s explanation fits the whole Shabad, and whether I have understood it properly.

We can also hear this in Bhagat Ravidas Ji’s Aarti. Here, Naam, the Creator’s Name, takes the place of the things used in worship:

ਨਾਮੁ ਤੇਰੋ ਆਰਤੀ ਮਜਨੁ ਮੁਰਾਰੇ ॥
ਹਰਿ ਕੇ ਨਾਮ ਬਿਨੁ ਝੂਠੇ ਸਗਲ ਪਾਸਾਰੇ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

Simple reading: Naam tero aartee majan Muraare.
Har ke Naam bin jhoothe sagal paasaare.

Plain meaning: Your Naam is my Aarti and bathing, O Murari. Without Hari’s Naam, all these displays are false.

Reference: Dhanasari, Bhagat Ravidas Ji, Panna 694. Complete Rahao; read with all four stanzas. Plain meaning informed by Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan.

Hari and Murari are names for the Creator in Darpan’s explanation. Bhagat Ravidas Ji takes us through the objects used in worship. Naam is the seat, the stone used to grind sandalwood and the water. Naam is the lamp, wick and oil. The Shabad asks what we can give the Creator when everything we bring already belongs to Him. The Shabad closes by offering Sat Naam, the True Name.

Remembering the Creator is the Aarti we are being taught to offer. If we stop at the words for lamps and offerings, we miss what Bhagat Ravidas Ji is telling us to do. Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s Aarti at Panna 663 opens with the sky as the tray and the sun and moon as lamps. That prayer ends by asking for grace to live in the Creator’s Naam.

The writer’s claim also rests on Ramanand in Bhagat Sain Ji’s third stanza. Professor Sahib Singh Ji reads the word as the joy of being united with Ram, a name for the Creator here. In that reading, the person who praises the Creator comes to know that joy through devotion.

Dr Sant Singh Khalsa reads Ramanand as a person’s name and says that Ramanand knows devotion to the Lord. A line saying that Ramanand knows devotion does not tell us that Bhagat Sain Ji is offering Aarti to Ramanand.

Guru Arjan Sahib Ji also tells us that the Creator lived in Bhagat Sain Ji’s heart and that Bhagat Sain Ji was counted among the Bhagats. We can read this in Asa, Mahalla 5, stanza 3, at Panna 487. Mahalla 5 identifies the Fifth Guru, Guru Arjan Sahib Ji, and the full Shabad continues onto Panna 488.

I cannot put the Guru’s words aside because a later writer calls Bhagat Sain Ji a Vaishnav.

We already sing these Shabads in our Gurdwaras. I want those who teach and lead the singing to make time to explain them, in words the sangat, the congregation, can understand. Take one complete Shabad, read the Rahao with the other verses and show how they fit together. Where translations differ, explain the difference and let people ask questions.

We can learn together at home too, but we cannot simply tell parents to teach their children when no one has helped the parents learn. Our Gurdwaras, and people who can explain Gurbani, should support those families. Someone who comes to the Guru with love deserves patient help to understand the words more fully.

Bhagat Bani already stands within the Guru we bow before. Its place is not for a later writer to approve or take away. Our responsibility is to learn what the Guru is teaching us, so that the prayer we sing becomes part of the life we lead.

This article is the short version of a full study, Who Decides What Bhagat Bani Means? That study also examines the story of Bhagat Dhanna Ji offering food to a stone, Bhagat Namdev Ji’s prayer asking the Creator to drink milk, and the Shabad naming Ram Chand as Dasarath’s son. Those passages need the same care. The discussion and sources are there.

Errors will be corrected publicly with a dated note.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

These claims matter because they are being presented as educational history, not simply as admiration for a ruler. They describe an organised programme and attribute its destruction to a named person.

There is evidence of teaching and reported support for teachers under the Lahore kingdom. The evidence examined so far has not established the Qaida-e-Noor programme or supported the allegation that Leitner destroyed its primer.

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji says:

ਵਿਦਿਆ ਵੀਚਾਰੀ ਤਾਂ ਪਰਉਪਕਾਰੀ ॥

Vidiaa veechaaree taan par-upkaaree.

Learning has truly been reflected upon when a person becomes of benefit to others.

Aasaa, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Chaupade, Shabad ending ॥੪॥੨੫॥, Panna 356. One-line continuous excerpt from the first stanza. [1]

Professor Sahib Singh Ji explains the line as a test of whether learning has genuinely been considered. The surrounding Shabad tests religious accomplishments in a similar way. The pilgrim’s outward practice is examined alongside mastery of the passions, while the Rahao, the central refrain, turns attention towards the mind’s attachment to the Divine. Learning belongs within that deeper concern with how a person lives before the One. [1]

That concern gives us a reason to ask what education did for people. In this inquiry, we need to establish what was taught, how teaching was supported and whom it reached. A worthy stated purpose cannot establish that a government adopted or fulfilled it. That requires historical evidence.

Teachers, books and the work of learning

The Lahore kingdom inherited several forms of education. Pandits taught Sanskrit and other subjects; Muslim establishments provided religious and linguistic instruction; munshis taught writing and skills used in clerical and government work. Commercial instruction addressed calculations and accounts. Learning also took place within households and Sikh congregational life. These arrangements differed in their purposes, resources and accessibility. [2, 4]

Title page of G. W. Leitner’s History of Indigenous Education in the Panjab since Annexation and in 1882 (Calcutta, 1882). This is Leitner’s report, not the Qaida-e-Noor primer. Source: Internet Archive. [2]

Leitner’s History of Indigenous Education in the Panjab since Annexation and in 1882 provides a useful description of elementary Gurmukhi instruction. Children began by forming letters on prepared ground, where mistakes could be erased. Some pupils also learned sayings arranged around the alphabet. They progressed to a wooden writing board, or patti. Instruction included numerals, weights, measures and familiar names. [2]

Published in 1882, more than thirty years after annexation in 1849, Leitner’s report combines descriptions from British rule with retrospective accounts. Its teaching sequence cannot automatically be assigned to Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s reign. The Maharaja died in 1839; political conflict and two Anglo-Sikh wars followed. The evidence assembled here cannot separately measure that decade’s educational effects. The Panjab Administration Report for 1849–1851, reproduced by Leitner, describes indigenous provision still operating. [2]

In his opening Introduction, Leitner called 330,000 earlier pupils his “lowest computation”, comparing this with a little over 190,000 in his own day. These are his estimates of pupils, rather than a population literacy census. They describe a substantial educational world, with teaching sustained beyond the court. [2]

Other sections of Leitner’s report discuss Persian literary and moral works, Sanskrit texts and grammar, and the arithmetic required for commercial activity. [2]

For the later nineteenth century, the report also records women teaching the Qur’an to girls and boys. Leitner names Bhani, mother of Ganda Singh, as teaching Gurmukhi to forty girls in their homes at Fattahabad. Mrs Mary Chatterji recommends paid pupil-teachers as a way to prepare older girls to teach. Miss W. N. Greenfield, quoted separately, describes children progressing more readily in Gurmukhi because they recognised the language. She explains how parents could encourage reading at home and how pupils could acquire the means to continue learning independently. [2]

Support for teachers and new proposals

Leitner’s account of Saydwala connects reported royal support with identifiable teaching. A later private survey response describes three Pandits teaching Sanskrit works to twelve pupils. It reports that under Maharaja Ranjit Singh the teachers had enjoyed two wells rent-free and an annual cash payment of 100 rupees. They reportedly had no income at the time of the later inquiry. [2]

The twelve pupils belong to that later inquiry, not automatically to the Maharaja’s reign. The account does not identify when or why the earlier support ended.

Cash and rent-free resources could sustain teachers without the ruler managing every lesson. Confirming an existing grant is different from founding an institution, however, and support for maintenance, worship or langar, the shared meal, should not all be counted as educational spending.

A separate episode concerns Fakir Nur-ud-Din, to whom modern accounts attribute Qaida-e-Noor. The American missionary John C. Lowrie reached Lahore in February 1835. In his published account, Lowrie says that the Maharaja had invited him to spend six months of each year there educating sons of Sikh chiefs. He declined that proposal on medical advice, although he accepted the invitation to visit. [3]

During the visit, Fakir Nur-ud-Din asked how Lowrie would teach English while knowing little of the local language and how pupils wanting different subjects would be taught. He also asked who should choose the subjects if the government established a school. Lowrie answered that the government should decide, while a prospective teacher could accept or decline its plan. Lowrie later recorded that two sons of one chief minister came wishing to study English under his direction during his stay. [3]

This is evidence of a particular educational proposal at court. Its intended pupils were sons of chiefs; it does not establish a village programme open to the wider population. Interest in English instruction and authorship of a multilingual primer remain separate historical claims.

What the Qaida-e-Noor accounts actually claim

The published trail includes earlier related accounts. Majid Sheikh’s 2006 column described an 1832 Punjabi Qaida scheme and gave a female-literacy figure without identifying the Company document behind it. His 2010 column alleged the burning of Punjabi primers after 1857. These are earlier related claims, rather than authentication of the full named Qaida-e-Noor programme. [8]

In her 2017 study, Refocusing on the Education System under the Sikh Rule, Robina Shoeb identifies the Fakir Khana family as the principal source of the primer account and says that Leitner also reported it. The family traces its descent from Fakir Nur-ud-Din and maintains a private museum in Lahore. Her Qaida section supplies no footnote identifying a manuscript or the relevant Leitner passage. [4]

Her account names the Gurmukhi and Shahmukhi scripts, Urdu and Persian, and elementary arithmetic among the primer’s contents. It describes about 5,000 booklets distributed to village headmen. Each headman was to learn the material within three months, pass copies to others and write to the Maharaja. [4]

Aashish Kochhar’s 2020 article, Maharaja Ranjit Singh: Pioneering Educator, repeats the teaching chain and attributes it to Leitner. Bhupinder ‘Bo’ Singh’s 2026 SikhNet article, When Literacy becomes Perceived Threat, gives literacy figures of 87 per cent around Lahore and 78 per cent in neighbouring areas. It places the introduction of the initiative in 1832 and a wider campaign in 1837. Those claims need to be distinguished from the alleged 1809 decision in the request sent to me; the different dates do not, by themselves, establish a contradiction. [5, 6]

Qaida refers to a primer and noor to light. The question is whether the particular book and programme can be established.

The headmen’s alleged three-month preparation would be a significant method of turning learners into instructors, without a separate training college. A surviving primer could establish the book’s existence; a distribution order, a headman’s letter or an account of copying costs could help establish the programme. The accounts examined have supplied neither an identifiable original primer nor a precise contemporary passage establishing its operation. Family information remains a lead, while the attribution to Leitner requires the relevant passage.

The percentages require a different kind of evidence. We need to know who was counted, what area was covered, what counted as literacy and how the calculation was made. A number of schools or pupils cannot establish the proportion of an entire population able to read and write.

Neither a contemporary distribution record nor an original calculation for those percentages has been located in this investigation. These gaps do not prove the primer never existed. They prevent us from presenting the programme as an established achievement.

Anu Bharat’s article about Dave Sidhu’s documentary appeared in NRI Affairs on 2 September 2021. It repeats the 87 and 78 per cent figures and says the Qaida “disappeared and was never seen again” under British rule. That is the promotional article’s assertion, rather than evidence of an exhaustive search. The Internet Archive item linked by SikhNet reproduces this piece; it is not an original copy of the historical primer. [6, 7]

The allegation against Leitner

Leitner’s 1882 report criticises the treatment of indigenous education under British administration. It reproduces an official passage describing departmental village schools being required to leave religious premises and discontinue religious books. Those decisions show direct intervention in where teaching took place and what could be taught. The passage does not name Qaida-e-Noor or establish that Leitner personally destroyed it. [2]

The earlier account does not establish that Leitner was responsible for the alleged burning. His appointment in Lahore in 1864 is a separate documented fact. Withdrawing a book from a school, physically destroying it and ordering its destruction are different actions; any specific allegation still requires evidence. [8, 9]

What should now be taught and recorded

There is evidence of teaching, reported material support and educational proposals under the Lahore kingdom. The village-literacy programme attributed to Qaida-e-Noor remains unverified: no authenticated 1809 order or contemporary distribution record has been located in this investigation. We have found no evidence that Leitner destroyed the primer, and no authenticated British holding has been identified. A library possessing Leitner’s report does not thereby possess Qaida-e-Noor. These limits do not erase the teachers or the support that can be identified.

Writers, teachers and institutions presenting this history should distinguish those findings clearly. The primer programme should be identified as unverified until evidence establishes its operation. The allegation against Leitner should not be repeated as fact.

There is also useful work to begin without waiting for Qaida-e-Noor. Archives, libraries and educational institutions can identify surviving teaching materials, record their dates, origins and known ownership, and make suitable images available. Captions should explain what each object is and the evidence connecting it to teaching.

Sources

[1] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Aasaa, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Chaupade, Shabad ending ॥੪॥੨੫॥, Panna 356. SriGranth, complete Panna; Professor Sahib Singh Ji, Sri Guru Granth Darpan, Panna 356. The plain-English rendering follows Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s explanation of the opening line.

[2] G. W. Leitner, History of Indigenous Education in the Panjab since Annexation and in 1882 (Calcutta, 1882): opening page of the Introduction, pupil estimates; Part I, printed pp. 33–34, Gurmukhi instruction; pp. 108–110, women teaching, pupil-teacher preparation and learning through the mother tongue; and p. 156, paragraphs 375–378 of the reproduced Panjab Administration Report for 1849–1851; Part II, printed p. 91, Saydwala return; Appendix VI, printed p. 20, paragraphs 17–19, school premises and books. Digitised 1882 edition.

[3] John C. Lowrie, Two Years in Upper India (New York: Robert Carter and Brothers, 1850), printed pp. 143–144, invitation and medical refusal; pp. 164–165, discussion with Fakir Nur-ud-Din; p. 169, two sons of one chief minister wishing to study English. This is the published account of the 1835 visit. See also Yaqoob Khan Bangash, “The Maharaja’s American visitor”, The News on Sunday, 6 July 2014; and “Missionaries, Christianity, and Education in 19th Century Punjab”, FWU Journal of Social Sciences, vol. 12, no. 1, Summer 2018, pp. 156–163. Lowrie’s page references here follow the inspected 1850 edition.

[4] Robina Shoeb, “Refocusing on the Education System under the Sikh Rule”, Journal of the Punjab University Historical Society, vol. 30, no. 2, July–December 2017, pp. 159–166; especially “Quaida Noor”, p. 164. For family context, see the museum’s “Fakir Family” account, 11 December 2007, and its museum introduction.

[5] Aashish Kochhar, “Maharaja Ranjit Singh: Pioneering Educator”, Live History India, 22 November 2020; especially “Qaida Noor: A Novel Method”.

[6] Bhupinder ‘Bo’ Singh, “When Literacy becomes Perceived Threat”, SikhNet, 8 January 2026; especially “Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s Education System”. Sources [4]–[6] identify the published claims being examined; they are not treated as independent authentication of the alleged programme.

[7] Anu Bharat, “Qaida-E-Noor: Dave Sidhu’s film explores Maharaja Ranjit Singh’s ‘Qaida method’ of learning”, NRI Affairs, 2 September 2021. Reproduced in the Internet Archive item titled Qaida E Noor, uploaded 8 May 2023. A modern piece about the documentary, not a surviving historical primer.

[8] Majid Sheikh, “The maharajah and education”, identified in the APNA reproduction as Dawn, 12 August 2006; and “Destruction of schools as Leitner saw them”, Dawn, 31 October 2010. These are earlier related published claims; the 2006 article was consulted through the APNA reproduction.

[9] British Library, Photo 1000/43(4431), catalogue record, “Scope & Content”: Leitner’s life dates and appointment as Principal of Government College, Lahore, in 1864.

Errors will be corrected publicly with a dated note.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu

PanthSeva

London

In many Gurdwaras, Sikhs sing a prayer known as Aarti. One of its Shabads is by Bhagat Sain Ji. A Shabad is a composition in Gurbani, the Guru’s Word. Bhagat means devotee.

A writer quoted by Professor Sahib Singh Ji says that Bhagat Sain Ji performed Aarti before the human teacher Ramanand. The writer calls Bhagat Sain Ji a committed Vaishnav, a devotee of Vishnu, and says that this worship went against Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s teaching. Professor Sahib Singh Ji records and answers this claim in Darpan, his commentary on Gurbani. [4]

Sikhs sing Bhagat Sain Ji’s Bani as Gurbani within Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Accepting that claim would mean treating part of Gurbani as teaching against the Guru. The religious names and offerings in these compositions are also used to argue that Sikhs should worship a picture or statue.

I do not accept either claim. A Bhagat’s background gives us no reason to reject Bani received under the Guru. Nor do the passages examined here instruct Sikhs to worship a picture or statue. They teach us to remember the Creator, offer ourselves to Him and seek His grace. We need to read each complete Shabad to understand what its names and offerings mean.

Bhagat Sain Ji’s opening shows why this matters. Dr Sant Singh Khalsa’s English translation on SriGranth describes an offering of incense, lamps and ghee, or clarified butter. It also says “I am a sacrifice”. Darpan explains the second line as the meaning of the first: offering oneself to the Creator is the Aarti. Dr Sant Singh Khalsa’s translation includes both ideas but does not explain how they belong together. [4]

Bhagat Ravidas Ji also speaks of Aarti. In the very line that addresses Murari, the offering is Naam. The verses that follow explain what that worship involves.

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

Panna means page. A stanza is a numbered group of lines. Names such as Dhanasari and Asa in the references are raags, the musical measures under which the Shabads are set.

Bhagat Ravidas Ji says:

ਨਾਮੁ ਤੇਰੋ ਆਰਤੀ ਮਜਨੁ ਮੁਰਾਰੇ ॥
ਹਰਿ ਕੇ ਨਾਮ ਬਿਨੁ ਝੂਠੇ ਸਗਲ ਪਾਸਾਰੇ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

Simple reading: Naam tero aartee majan Muraare.
Har ke Naam bin jhoothe sagal paasaare.

Plain meaning: Your Naam is my Aarti and bathing, O Murari. Without Hari’s Naam, all these displays are false.

Reference: Dhanasari, Bhagat Ravidas Ji, Panna 694. Complete Rahao; read with all four stanzas. [2]

Naam is the Creator’s Name. Darpan explains Hari and Murari here as names used to address the Creator. Rahao marks a pause. These lines give the main thought of the Shabad, and the following verses explain it.

Bhagat Ravidas Ji takes us through the objects used in worship. Naam is the seat on which the worshipper sits. Naam is the stone used to grind sandalwood, the saffron and the water. Then Naam becomes the lamp, wick and oil. The Shabad asks what we can offer the Creator when everything we bring already belongs to Him. Its closing offering is Sat Naam, the True Name. [2]

Naam takes the place of each object. Bhagat Ravidas Ji is not simply asking us to bring the same tray with more love in our hearts. Remembering the Creator is the Aarti being offered here.

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s Aarti at Panna 663 opens with the sky as the tray and the sun and moon as lamps. The Shabad speaks of the One present throughout creation and of the light we come to recognise through the Guru’s teaching. It ends by asking for grace, the Creator’s help and blessing. Bhagat Kabir Ji’s Aarti at Panna 1350 makes knowledge the oil, Naam the wick and light within the body the lamp. Its Rahao turns us towards the Guru and the One present everywhere. The closing stanza speaks of the Creator being near and of joy within. [3]

These are prayers full of love. They teach us to turn to the Creator and depend on Him. Understanding the words helps us put that worship into practice.

The Guru Granth Sahib Project lists longer versions of the Aarti recited today. They include five Shabads: those of Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Bhagat Ravidas Ji, Bhagat Sain Ji, Bhagat Kabir Ji and Bhagat Dhanna Ji. The lists differ and include other compositions too. This study looks at these five Shabads and at the other passages and stories used in arguments about them. [1]

Bhagat Sain Ji’s offering

Bhagat Ravidas Ji puts Naam in place of the objects of worship. Bhagat Sain Ji names incense, lamps and ghee too. We need to read what follows those words before deciding what is being offered:

ਧੂਪ ਦੀਪ ਘ੍ਰਿਤ ਸਾਜਿ ਆਰਤੀ ॥
ਵਾਰਨੇ ਜਾਉ ਕਮਲਾ ਪਤੀ ॥੧॥

Simple reading: Dhoop deep ghrit saaj aartee.
Vaarane jaau kamalaa patee.

Plain meaning, following Darpan’s interpretation: O Master of Kamala, I am a sacrifice to You. This self-offering is my Aarti, my offering of incense, lamps and ghee.

Reference: Dhanasari, Bhagat Sain Ji, Panna 695. Complete stanza 1; read with the Rahao and all four stanzas. “This self-offering” is added in English to show how Darpan explains the two lines together. [4]

Kamala is a name of Lakshmi, the Hindu goddess. The next stanza again names the lamp and its wick:

ਊਤਮੁ ਦੀਅਰਾ ਨਿਰਮਲ ਬਾਤੀ ॥
ਤੁਹੀਂ ਨਿਰੰਜਨੁ ਕਮਲਾ ਪਾਤੀ ॥੨॥

Simple reading: Ootam dee-araa nirmal baatee.
Tuheen niranjan kamalaa paatee.

Plain meaning, following Darpan’s interpretation: O Master of Kamala, You alone, Niranjan, are for me the finest lamp and the pure wick.

Reference: Dhanasari, Bhagat Sain Ji, Panna 695. Complete stanza 2; read with stanza 1, the Rahao and the remaining stanzas. [4]

Niranjan is a name for the One untouched by Maya. Maya is the pull of worldly things. Darpan again explains the two lines together: the Creator Himself is the lamp and wick. In this reading, the joy in the Rahao comes through the Creator’s grace. The closing stanza asks the mind to remember the One who carries us beyond fear. [4]

We also need to look at Ramanand in stanza 3, since the writer takes it to be the human teacher’s name.

Professor Sahib Singh Ji explains the names in this Shabad as names for the Creator, rather than a human teacher. In Darpan’s reading, Ramanand in stanza 3 means the joy of being united with Ram, a name for the Creator here. It explains madan moorati in stanza 4 as a beautiful form that brings joy to the person seeing it. [4]

Dr Sant Singh Khalsa’s translation takes Ramanand to be a person’s name and says that Ramanand knows devotion to the Lord. I follow Darpan because its explanation lets us read the prayer as a whole. Bhagat Sain Ji offers himself to the Creator, then names Him as the lamp and wick. The prayer also speaks of joy through grace and asks the mind to remember Him. Even if Ramanand is a person’s name, the line does not say that Bhagat Sain Ji is performing Aarti before him.

The other Shabads on the same Panna also show why we need to read beyond a familiar name or object. Bhagat Peepa Ji speaks of the body as the temple and places the deity and offerings within it. The Shabad speaks of the One who is within us and throughout creation, whom we come to know through the Guru. Bhagat Trilochan Ji recalls stories from the Puranas, Hindu religious books, about deities who themselves suffer. Those stories ask us to think about why we depend on them. The closing lines turn to the Creator’s Naam. [5]

What the Guru says about the Bhagats

Guru Arjan Sahib Ji also speaks about Bhagat Sain Ji. Those words matter when a later writer says that Bhagat Sain Ji’s worship went against Guru Nanak Sahib Ji. The Shabad runs across Pannas 487–488. Just before it comes Bhagat Dhanna Ji’s own Shabad, on Panna 487, describing devotion to the Creator.

Bhagat Dhanna Ji begins with a mind caught in greed and desire, forgetting the Creator. In stanza 3, the Guru gives the understanding that Bhagat Dhanna Ji describes as wealth. Through loving devotion, the mind becomes united with the Creator and is satisfied. The closing stanza says:

ਜੋਤਿ ਸਮਾਇ ਸਮਾਨੀ ਜਾ ਕੈ ਅਛਲੀ ਪ੍ਰਭੁ ਪਹਿਚਾਨਿਆ ॥
ਧੰਨੈ ਧਨੁ ਪਾਇਆ ਧਰਣੀਧਰੁ ਮਿਲਿ ਜਨ ਸੰਤ ਸਮਾਨਿਆ ॥੪॥੧॥

Simple reading: Jot samaai samaanee jaa kai achhalee prabh pahichaaniaa.
Dhannai dhan paaiaa dharaneedhar mil jan sant samaaniaa.

Plain meaning: The one in whom the Divine Light has settled recognises the Creator who cannot be deceived. Dhanna has found the Sustainer of the earth as his wealth; meeting the saintly servants, he has merged in Him.

Reference: Asa, Bhagat Dhanna Ji, Panna 487. Complete stanza 4; read with the Rahao and all four stanzas. [6]

Immediately afterwards is a Shabad headed Mahalla 5. This tells us that it is by the Fifth Guru, Guru Arjan Sahib Ji. Its Rahao speaks of Bhagat Namdev Ji’s mind absorbed in the Creator. A poor cloth printer becomes worth lakhs, or hundreds of thousands. The Shabad is speaking of the worth he gains through devotion, rather than promising him money. The following stanzas describe Bhagat Kabir Ji’s love for the Creator’s feet and Bhagat Ravidas Ji’s freedom from attachment to Maya. Then come these two stanzas, one after the other:

ਸੈਨੁ ਨਾਈ ਬੁਤਕਾਰੀਆ ਓਹੁ ਘਰਿ ਘਰਿ ਸੁਨਿਆ ॥
ਹਿਰਦੇ ਵਸਿਆ ਪਾਰਬ੍ਰਹਮੁ ਭਗਤਾ ਮਹਿ ਗਨਿਆ ॥੩॥
ਇਹ ਬਿਧਿ ਸੁਨਿ ਕੈ ਜਾਟਰੋ ਉਠਿ ਭਗਤੀ ਲਾਗਾ ॥
ਮਿਲੇ ਪ੍ਰਤਖਿ ਗੁਸਾਈਆ ਧੰਨਾ ਵਡਭਾਗਾ ॥੪॥੨॥

Simple reading: Sain naaee butkaareeaa oh ghar ghar suniaa.
Hirde vasiaa paarbrahm bhagtaa meh ganiaa.
Ih bidh sun kai jaataro uth bhagatee laagaa.
Mile pratakh gusaaeeaa dhannaa vadabhaagaa.

Plain meaning: Sain, the barber who did people’s errands, became known from house to house. The Supreme Creator dwelt in his heart, and he was counted among the Bhagats. Hearing of this way, the poor Jat arose and took to devotion. Dhanna met the Master directly and became greatly fortunate.

Reference: Asa, Mahalla 5, Guru Arjan Sahib Ji, Pannas 487 and 488. Stanza 3 is on Panna 487 and stanza 4 is on Panna 488, both complete and given together. Read with the Rahao and stanzas 1 and 2. [6]

Jat is the name of a community linked with farming. The meanings “did people’s errands” and “poor Jat” follow Darpan’s explanations of the words in the Shabad. Bhagat Dhanna Ji heard about this life of devotion and followed it. [6]

Guru Arjan Sahib Ji tells us that the Creator dwelt in Bhagat Sain Ji’s heart and that Bhagat Sain Ji was counted among the Bhagats. We cannot put those words aside and dismiss him because a later writer calls him a Vaishnav.

Darpan also quotes a writer who says that the Master whom Bhagat Dhanna Ji met was Swami Ramanand. The writer questions whether the Shabad is really by Guru Arjan Sahib Ji, despite the Mahalla 5 heading. The reason given is that the Guru would not have named the Bhagats’ castes and the work they did.

Professor Sahib Singh Ji points to the heading, which tells us who composed the Shabad. Darpan also gives other passages where the Gurus name the Bhagats’ castes. At Panna 74, Guru Arjan Sahib Ji’s own Bani uses Gosai for the Creator. So when the word Gosai appears here, we cannot assume that it means Ramanand. [6]

The Shabad names the work these people did, then tells us what devotion brought into their lives. The poor cloth printer, weaver, worker handling dead animals and barber are honoured here. The Guru is not teaching us to treat people as higher or lower because of their caste.

Bhagat Dhanna Ji and the stone

Guru Arjan Sahib Ji describes Bhagat Dhanna Ji following the way of devotion he had heard about. There is also a story of Bhagat Dhanna Ji offering food to a stone. Does that story teach Sikhs to worship a stone?

We cannot dismiss it as a story found only outside Sikh tradition. Bhai Gurdas Ji tells it in Vaar 10, pauri 13. A Vaar is a poetic composition made up of stanzas called pauris. In the story, a Brahmin gives Bhagat Dhanna Ji a stone. Bhagat Dhanna Ji bathes it and offers food, and the Master appears and eats. The pauri ends by saying that innocent love brought the devotee to Gobind, a name for the Creator. [7]

The story tells us about the Creator answering a devotee’s love. Before telling Sikhs to worship a stone because of it, we need to read what Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji teaches about trusting a stone.

Bhagat Dhanna Ji’s Shabad on Panna 487 does not mention a stone. But we cannot use that fact alone to say that the story never happened.

Guru Arjan Sahib Ji describes someone who calls a stone his Master:

ਜਿਸੁ ਪਾਹਣ ਕਉ ਠਾਕੁਰੁ ਕਹਤਾ ॥
ਓਹੁ ਪਾਹਣੁ ਲੈ ਉਸ ਕਉ ਡੁਬਤਾ ॥੨॥

Simple reading: Jis paahan kau thaakur kahataa.
Oh paahan lai us kau dubataa.

Plain meaning: The stone he calls his Master sinks, taking him down with it.

Reference: Suhi, Mahalla 5, Guru Arjan Sahib Ji, Panna 739. Complete stanza 2; read with the Rahao and all four stanzas. [8]

The person described in this Shabad hangs a stone around his neck while failing to recognise the Creator within. The Rahao compares his effort to churning water: it cannot produce butter. The Shabad also speaks of a stone boat that cannot carry him across. It ends by turning us to the Guru, through whom we come to know the Creator and recognise Him throughout water, land and sky. [8]

Guru Arjan Sahib Ji warns us against trusting a stone to save us. We should read the story about Bhagat Dhanna Ji with that warning in mind. The Creator’s love for a devotee does not teach Sikhs to put their trust in a stone.

Bhagat Namdev Ji’s milk Shabad

The stone story is in Bhai Gurdas Ji’s Vaar. Bhagat Namdev Ji’s offering of milk is described in Gurbani itself, at Pannas 1163–1164. There is milk in a bowl and a prayer asking Gobind to drink it. In the Rahao, there is a fear that the father of the house will otherwise be displeased. Later verses describe a golden bowl filled with nectar and the Creator taking delight in the devotee. The closing stanza speaks of giving milk and returning home, and of Bhagat Namdev Ji seeing the Creator. [9]

For Darpan, the father of the house is the inner self, the golden bowl is the heart made pure, and the nectar is Naam. Darpan understands returning home as the mind settling within itself. To explain the golden bowl, it points to the golden needle in another of Bhagat Namdev Ji’s Shabads. [9]

The words for milk and a bowl are there in the Shabad. Darpan explains them as part of a prayer of loving service, in which the Creator answers the devotee and brings peace.

Readers may understand the offering of milk differently from Darpan. Even so, the Shabad does not say that the milk is being given to a stone statue. At Panna 487, Bhagat Ravidas Ji also recalls Bhagat Namdev Ji and the milk while speaking of being saved through remembrance of the Creator. Neither Shabad tells Sikhs to feed a statue. We can recognise the Creator’s care for Bhagat Namdev Ji without teaching that practice. [6, 9]

Ram Chand in Bhagat Namdev Ji’s Shabad

The milk Shabad does not name a stone statue. At Panna 973, Bhagat Namdev Ji does name Ram Chand as the son of King Dasarath. The same Shabad compares strict religious practices, bathing at pilgrimage places and costly gifts with Naam. Its Rahao asks the mind to stop making a show of religion and to remember the Creator all the time. The final stanza says:

ਮਨਹਿ ਨ ਕੀਜੈ ਰੋਸੁ ਜਮਹਿ ਨ ਦੀਜੈ ਦੋਸੁ ਨਿਰਮਲ ਨਿਰਬਾਣ ਪਦੁ ਚੀਨੑਿ ਲੀਜੈ ॥
ਜਸਰਥ ਰਾਇ ਨੰਦੁ ਰਾਜਾ ਮੇਰਾ ਰਾਮ ਚੰਦੁ ਪ੍ਰਣਵੈ ਨਾਮਾ ਤਤੁ ਰਸੁ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤੁ ਪੀਜੈ ॥੪॥੪॥

Simple reading: Maneh na keejai ros jameh na deejai dos nirmal nirbaan pad cheenh leejai.
Jasrath raai nand raajaa meraa raam chand pranavai naamaa tat ras amrit peejai.

Plain meaning, following Darpan’s interpretation: Hold no resentment in the mind and do not blame the messenger of death; recognise the pure state free from desire. Namdev prays: drink the nectar of Naam, the essential sweetness; for me, this is King Ram Chand, son of King Dasarath.

Reference: Ramkali Ghar 2, Bhagat Namdev Ji, Panna 973. Complete stanza 4; read with the Rahao and all four stanzas. “Naam” and “this is” are added in English to explain Darpan’s reading of the whole Shabad. [10]

Professor Sahib Singh Ji does not avoid the difficult words. Naming Dasarath tells us which Ram Chand is meant. Darpan therefore does not explain this as just another name for the Creator. It also rejects “the king of Dasarath’s son”, explaining that the word means “son”, not “son’s”. [10]

Darpan explains that Naam is Bhagat Namdev Ji’s Ram Chand. The earlier verses have already called the mind to remember the Creator. An avatar is a divine figure believed to have come into the world in earthly form. Darpan puts worship of an avatar’s picture or statue alongside the strict religious practices, ceremonies with offerings, pilgrimage bathing and costly gifts discussed earlier. Darpan explains that remembering the Creator is greater than all these practices. [10]

I follow Darpan here because it faces the reference to Ram Chand, son of Dasarath, and explains it through what the rest of the Shabad says about Naam. Readers should be able to question that explanation. But we cannot take the name Ram Chand out of this prayer and use it to tell Sikhs to worship a picture or statue, while ignoring the verses that call us to remember the Creator.

Bhagat Dhanna Ji’s prayer for daily needs

Bhagat Dhanna Ji’s prayer brings us back to the Aarti sequence. To understand it, we need to know what aartaa means. Is it another word for Aarti, or does it describe someone asking for help? On Panna 695, the prayer says:

ਗੋਪਾਲ ਤੇਰਾ ਆਰਤਾ ॥
ਜੋ ਜਨ ਤੁਮਰੀ ਭਗਤਿ ਕਰੰਤੇ ਤਿਨ ਕੇ ਕਾਜ ਸਵਾਰਤਾ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

Simple reading: Gopaal teraa aartaa.
Jo jan tumree bhagat karante tin ke kaaj savaartaa.

Plain meaning: O Sustainer of the world, I am Your needy petitioner. You bring to fulfilment the affairs of those who practise devotion to You.

Reference: Dhanasari, Bhagat Dhanna Ji, Panna 695. Complete Rahao; read with both stanzas. [11]

Dr Sant Singh Khalsa’s translation describes worship with lamps. Darpan explains aartaa as a person in need or distress, asking for help. It says that this is a different word from aartee, the word for Aarti. The verses ask for food, clothing, animals and help in household life. These are requests to the Creator who provides for us. [11]

Darpan explains that this prayer stands beside the Aarti Shabads in Dhanasari because the words aartaa and aartee are so alike. The Guru Granth Sahib Project also explains that this Shabad is different from Aarti. That does not tell us when or how people put together the longer Aarti recited today. [1, 11]

Darpan also explains why we can ask the Creator for our daily needs. We do not have to be embarrassed by a prayer for food or clothing, or by the needs of a household. Bhagat Dhanna Ji brings these things before the One who provides for us. Singing this prayer among the Aarti Shabads does not turn these requests into worship with lamps.

Who, then, decides?

We began with a writer’s claim that Bhagat Sain Ji’s worship went against Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s teaching. Darpan explains the offering as giving oneself to the Creator, in a prayer that goes on to name Him as the lamp and wick. Guru Arjan Sahib Ji tells us that the Creator dwelt in Bhagat Sain Ji’s heart. A later writer’s religious label gives me no reason to put those words aside.

I receive Bhagat Bani as Gurbani under Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Darpan helps me understand it, but the Guru’s Word comes first. If I add words in English to explain how two lines fit together, I must tell the reader. And readers should be able to ask whether I have understood the Bani properly.

The stone story and the milk prayer speak of the Creator responding to a devotee’s love. They do not tell Sikhs to feed a statue. Nor does the name Ram Chand erase the call to remember the Creator in the same Shabad. Words also used in Hindu worship do not make Sikhi a Hindu tradition.

In our Gurdwaras, those who teach and lead the singing should make time to explain the words in language the sangat, the congregation, understands. They can take one complete Shabad, read the Rahao with the other verses and explain how they fit together. If translations give different meanings, show the reader what the difference is. People should be able to ask what a line means and receive patient help.

We can begin that work at home too. Someone who comes to Gurbani with love deserves help to understand it more fully. A parent who was never taught cannot simply be told to teach a child. Gurdwaras and those able to explain Gurbani have a responsibility to support them.

Bhagat Bani already stands within the Guru we bow before. Its place is not for a later writer to approve or take away. Our responsibility is to learn what the Guru is teaching us, so that the prayer we sing becomes part of the life we lead.

Related work

The first essay in this two-part publication, Why Sikhi Rejects Worship through Images and Sacred Rivers, examines published claims about images, offerings and sacred rivers.

Sources

Checked to 16 October 2026. The quoted Gurmukhi and Panna references were checked against SriGranth on 8 October 2026. Darpan’s relevant explanations under Pannas 74, 487, 694, 695 and 973 were checked again on 16 October 2026. Gurmukhi remains primary. The Roman readings and plain-English meanings are my learning aids, informed by Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan. Where explanations differ, the essay says which one I have followed. Read each complete Shabad, including its Rahao and any continuation across Pannas.

[1] The Aarti sequences. The Guru Granth Sahib Project’s introduction distinguishes the Amrit Keertan list, citing the Khalsa Brothers edition, Amritsar, 2011, pages 835–838, from recitation at Sri Darbar Sahib on 15 December 2019. Both contain these five Shabads and further compositions. The date and manner of the sequences’ development are not established there.

[2] Bhagat Ravidas Ji, Dhanasari, Panna 694, complete Shabad. SriGranth; Darpan. Darpan explains Hari and Murari here as names used to address the Creator.

[3] Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s Aarti, Dhanasari, Panna 663; also recorded at Panna 13. Darpan, Panna 663. Bhagat Kabir Ji’s complete Prabhati Aarti, Panna 1350: SriGranth; Darpan.

[4] Bhagat Sain Ji, Dhanasari, Panna 695, complete Shabad and the objection discussed after it in Darpan: Darpan; SriGranth. The quoted English follows Darpan. SriGranth identifies Dr Sant Singh Khalsa’s translation as its default English version in its acknowledgements. The nasal mark in ਤੁਹੀਂ is rendered in standard Unicode for display, checked against the complete Sain Ji text on Dekho Ji.

[5] Bhagat Peepa Ji and Bhagat Trilochan Ji, complete Dhanasari Shabads, Panna 695: SriGranth; Darpan.

[6] Bhagat Dhanna Ji’s Asa Shabad, the following Mahalla 5 Shabad, and Bhagat Ravidas Ji’s reference to Bhagat Namdev Ji and milk: SriGranth, Panna 487 and Panna 488; Darpan, commentary under Panna 487. “Did people’s errands” and “poor Jat” follow Darpan’s explanations of butkaareeaa and jaataro. Its Gosai comparison is from Siri Raag, Mahalla 5, stanza 17, Panna 74; compare Darpan, Panna 74. In the notes discussed here, Darpan gives no name or original publication for the writer whose objections it records. I have not established whether the objections at Pannas 487 and 695 came from the same writer. This essay discusses them as Darpan gives them.

[7] Bhai Gurdas Ji, Vaar 10, complete pauri 13: Gurmukhi reproduction on Dekho Ji. The story is retold here separately from Gurbani. The Gurmukhi is the source; the site’s English translation does not decide its meaning.

[8] Suhi, Mahalla 5, Guru Arjan Sahib Ji, Panna 739, complete Shabad: SriGranth; Darpan.

[9] Bhagat Namdev Ji’s milk Shabad, Bhairau Ghar 1, Pannas 1163–1164: SriGranth, Panna 1163 and Panna 1164. Darpan places the complete commentary under Panna 1163. Its readings of the father, bowl and nectar are identified as interpretations in the essay.

[10] Bhagat Namdev Ji, Ramkali Ghar 2, Panna 973, complete Shabad and discussion of Ram Chand: SriGranth; Darpan. The English meaning follows Darpan. The words added to explain this reading are identified beside the quotation.

[11] Bhagat Dhanna Ji’s Dhanasari prayer, Panna 695, complete Shabad and Darpan’s notes on aartaa and daily needs: SriGranth; Darpan. The Guru Granth Sahib Project’s introduction also explains that this Shabad is different from Aarti. It suggests that aartaa was mistaken for a masculine form of aartee.

Errors will be corrected publicly with a dated note in this section.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

Bangla Sahib is a very important gurdwara to me. When I was in Delhi on business, staying in hotels in Connaught Place, I spent many evenings there after work. My concern for it goes beyond the conduct of police on one day.

On 10 October 2026, people taking part in the Cockroach Janta Party’s protest sought shelter there. Allegations followed that police entered wearing shoes and without covering their heads. Police said the footage showed a passage before the shoe-removal point. The Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee (DSGMC) accused protesters of political activity inside the premises and filed a complaint; an FIR followed. An independent inquiry must establish what happened and who bears responsibility. [1, 12]

But how can we be so concerned about who walks into a gurdwara and give so little attention to who holds power over it?

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji gives us the starting point for understanding the gathering:

ਸਤਸੰਗਤਿ ਕੈਸੀ ਜਾਣੀਐ ॥
ਜਿਥੈ ਏਕੋ ਨਾਮੁ ਵਖਾਣੀਐ ॥

Simple reading: satsangat kaisee jaaneeai.
jithai eko naam vakhaaneeai.

Plain meaning: How is the true congregation recognised? Where the Name of the One alone is praised.

Reference: Siri Raag, Mahalla 1, Ghar 3, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Panna 72, stanza 5. Continuous two-line excerpt; the complete Shabad spans Pannas 71–73, with Rahao on Panna 71. [2]

The Rahao expresses love and an offering of oneself to the One. The Shabad speaks of understanding received through the Guru, the removal of pride and the grace that brings people into union. Managing a gurdwara should serve that relationship. Holding office gives no one ownership of the Guru’s house. [2]

Fifteen years without a fresh vote

The Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee (SGPC) manages many historic gurdwaras. Its last general election was in 2011. Sikh voters have gone fifteen years without a fresh vote to choose their representatives, while existing members continue to hold office. The 1925 Act allows them to remain until a new Board is constituted, even after the five-year term. [8, 9]

The Union Home Ministry handles the Sikh Gurdwaras Act 1925 and SGPC matters through Internal Security-I. Its own work list puts them under “Punjab related security matters” and assigns the division responsibility for appointing Chief Commissioners for Gurdwara Elections. The law gives the Centre power over election dates; the Chief Commissioner sets the polling timetable, subject to court directions. Sikh voters depend on that machinery before they can choose a new SGPC. [7, 8]

Yet the executive of this SGPC appoints and removes Jathedars. In March 2025, it announced the removal of the Jathedar of Sri Akal Takht Sahib and appointments affecting all three Takhts in Panjab. Sikh voters must wait on government election machinery to replace the body that chooses the Jathedars. [8–10]

Bangla Sahib faces its own version of this dependence. The DSGMC’s elections are run by the Delhi Government’s Directorate of Gurdwara Elections. Its last general election was in August 2021. In February 2026, the High Court ordered elections by 30 September; in July, the authorities sought six more months. Sikh voters’ opportunity to choose new management has become caught in extensions and court proceedings. [3–5]

Delhi Police answer through the Lieutenant Governor and the Union Home Ministry. The government’s dealings with the gurdwara management over the protest must be disclosed. The inquiry should examine whether powers over the DSGMC election timetable were used to exert pressure. That link remains unproved. It must also examine the reported staff-member account that management refused police requests to send protesters out. [1, 3–6]

At Takht Sri Hazur Sahib, Maharashtra’s government has the power to nominate the board president. At Takht Sri Patna Sahib, the District Judge nominates three committee members. Haryana’s committee began with government nominees in 2014 and held its first general election only in January 2025. These powers and delays concern Sikh religious management. An inquiry into police boots will not remove them. [14]

Our reformers fought to recover Sikh control of the gurdwaras. A century later, we still depend on government before Sikh voters can elect a new SGPC. That dependence must end.

A Sikh name is not enough

Sikh office-holders must answer for their part in this. Leaders who put their positions, wealth or party above the sangat betray the inheritance of the Gurdwara Reform Movement. Sikh names in high office are no substitute for Sikh accountability.

Nor can concern for the gurdwara change with party allegiance. After police action at Sultanpur Lodhi’s Gurdwara Sri Akal Bunga Sahib in November 2023, an SGPC inquiry held Chief Minister Bhagwant Mann responsible and alleged unnecessary firing and entry in shoes during an Akhand Paath, a continuous reading of Gurbani. The Jathedar of Sri Akal Takht Sahib held the Chief Minister guilty of religious misconduct. Police said Nihangs fired first; home guard Jaspal Singh died. [11]

Bhagwant Mann condemned the “BJP’s police” after Bangla Sahib. He must answer for police conduct under his own government with the same seriousness. Neither government should escape scrutiny because its opponent is being questioned. [11, 12]

I have seen people and groups fighting, literally, over committees in British gurdwaras. The police were called and came in wearing boots. Having Sikhs on every committee seat does not, by itself, give us management faithful to the Guru.

Freedom from government control must not give a family or faction freedom to possess the institution. Managers must open the accounts, explain decisions and submit to regular elections. People must be able to raise concerns without being treated as enemies. Sikh self-management must remain subject to ordinary civil and criminal accountability and protect people seeking help.

What we must demand

The immediate demand is SGPC elections now, with legal obstacles addressed openly. Delhi’s authorities must publish and fulfil a firm, lawful election timetable and explain the delays. We need an orderly, peaceful transition to accountable Sikh religious self-management, with a credible voice for Sikhs outside India wherever decisions claim authority over us all.

But we must be clear about what we are seeking control for. The Guru’s word is recited, but too little is explained, understood and lived. Too few are helping our children, or the parents who were never properly taught. A gurdwara should provide patient help with Gurbani and give families somewhere to turn when they want to learn. [2]

I want those who already come with love to deepen their relationship with the Guru. Learning, prayer and dependence on the One belong together. We should help families open Gurbani now, while challenging those who refuse to answer for the institutions they manage.

The decisions that led to 1984, and the killings and disappearances that followed, still require an honest accounting. Human Rights Watch and Ensaaf documented police abductions, unlawful killings, secret cremations and the obstacles families faced in seeking justice. [13]

People of my age were denied their lives and all that brings: children, family life, time with their parents and the chance to grow old. Their families were left to carry the loss. Remembering that loss should make us determined to act intelligently and peacefully.

I pray that we do not see any more deaths or lives destroyed. Our concern must be the people who will live with the consequences of our decisions, not how we want to be remembered.

We should all demand elections and accountable management, and begin helping children and parents understand Gurbani. Otherwise, we will keep protesting about what happens at the gurdwara door while leaving the powers over the Guru’s house untouched.

Related work

Amended by Empire, Province and Parliament. Never by the Panth.
Read source

The New Mahants Hold the Gate
Read source

SGPC Elections and the Future of Sikh Self-Management
Read source

Sources

Source record to 14 October 2026, combining retained checks with focused checks for this revision. The Bangla Sahib account relies on the reporting below; the full video, FIR and memorandum were not independently examined. The Delhi chronology distinguishes court records from a reported election forecast.

[1] Aditi Tandon, “Delhi Police to take legal action over ‘malicious’ video showing cops wearing shoes inside Gurdwara Bangla Sahib”, The Tribune, 10 October 2026:
Read source
Sakshi Chand and Pragynesh, “FIR lodged over alleged AAP protest inside Gurdwara Bangla Sahib”, The Indian Express, 12 October 2026:
Read source
Neeraj Bali, “AAP MLAs move Akal Takht over Bangla Sahib police action, seek accountability”, UNI, 12 October 2026:
Read source
Saurabh Sharma, Sarita Chaganti Singh and Sakshi Dayal, “India detains thousands, locks down Delhi to foil election chief protest”, Reuters, 10 October 2026, updated 11 October:
Read source
The Indian Express report also attributes to a staff member the account that management refused police requests to send protesters out.

[2] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, SriGranth, Panna 72:
SriGranth, Panna 72
English meaning follows Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan, complete unit across Pannas 71–73:
Darpan, Panna 71
Darpan, Panna 72
Darpan, Panna 73
For the brief Hukam gloss, see Japji Sahib, Pauri 2, Panna 1, read with Darpan.

[3] Government of NCT of Delhi, Directorate of Gurdwara Elections:
Read source
Delhi Sikh Gurdwaras Act 1971, section 5, reproduced by eCourtsIndia. The four-year term starts at the committee’s first meeting, rather than on polling day:
Read source

[4] Delhi High Court, S. Gurmeet Singh Shunty v Directorate of Gurdwara Elections, W.P.(C) 887/2025 and connected matters: order of 24 February 2026, especially paragraphs 2 and 11:
Read source
Order of 13 July 2026, paragraphs 1 and 7:
Read source
Gurvinder Singh v Neeraj Semwal, 24 August 2026, paragraphs 5–7:
Read source
The latter records submissions about a 12 August order and affidavit; those underlying documents were not independently inspected.

[5] “Sharp Decline in Delhi Sikh Voters Alarming, Says Former DSGMC Member Inder Mohan Singh”, Yes Punjab, 26 September 2026:
Read source
The prospective polling period is attributed to Singh, not presented as a final notification.

[6] Constitution of India, Article 239AA(3)(a); Government of NCT of Delhi v Union of India, Supreme Court, 29 November 2023, paragraphs 17–18. Delhi Police Act 1978, section 4. Ministry of Home Affairs, Union Territories Division, statement of responsibilities, including Delhi Police.
India Code, Delhi Police Act:
Read source
MHA, Union Territories responsibilities on its AGMUT Cadre Management page:
Read source

[7] Ministry of Home Affairs, Allocation of Work of Internal Security-I Division, items 19 and 21:
Read source

[8] Sikh Gurdwaras Act 1925, sections 47, 47A and 51, Ministry of Home Affairs-hosted consolidation, printed pages 44–46:
Read source
Ministry of Home Affairs, Lok Sabha Unstarred Question 4143, answered 19 August 2025, on the Chief Commissioner’s election timetable under the 1959 Rules:
Read source
The answer reports a court stay then; it does not establish its status in October 2026.

[9] Charanjit Singh Teja, “Sikh outfits urge Amit Shah to expedite SGPC elections”, The Tribune, 10 October 2026:
Read source

[10] SGPC, “SGPC announces budget session on March 28; key decisions taken on Jathedar appointments”, 7 March 2025:
Read source

[11] SGPC, “SGPC probe panel holds Chief Minister responsible for incident of firing at Gurdwara Sahib of Sultanpur Lodhi”, 8 January 2024:
Read source
Deepkamal Kaur, “Home guard killed, 14 cops injured as Nihangs open fire in Kapurthala”, The Tribune, 24 November 2023:
Read source
Kamaldeep Singh Brar, “Akal Takht Jathedar holds CM Bhagwant Mann guilty of ‘religious misconduct’ over Kapurthala gurdwara clash”, The Indian Express, 21 January 2024, updated 22 January:
Read source
Panel findings, the police account and the Takht decision are attributed; none is presented as a court judgement.

[12] “Punjab CM Mann slams Delhi Police over shoes at Gurdwara Bangla Sahib, alleges ‘Taliban-like’ attitude”, The New Indian Express, 11 October 2026, with PTI inputs, reproducing Bhagwant Mann’s statement and the police response:
Read source

[13] Human Rights Watch and Ensaaf, Protecting the Killers: A Policy of Impunity in Punjab, India, 17 October 2007, Summary and “Failure of Justice”:
Read source

[14] Nanded Sikh Gurudwara Sachkhand Shri Hazur Apchalnagar Sahib (Amendment) Act 2015, Maharashtra Act XVI of 2015, section 3, substituting section 11(1), Gazette reproduction:
Read source
The Sikh Collective v State of Bihar, Patna High Court, 16 February 2024, paragraphs 1 and 4–5:
Read source
Parveen Arora, “Explainer: Only months after electing chief, Sikh gurdwara panel battles infighting”, The Tribune, 23 July 2025, section on establishment and the first election:
Read source
The 2024 Nanded proposal is not treated as the enacted board composition.

Errors will be corrected publicly with a dated note.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

Sikhs also sing Shabads called Aarti. These Shabads do not endorse the lamp ceremony. Gurbani rejects worship of the carved image and the claim that sacred water removes sin. Those rejections also bind Sikhs. The question is why: if the One is present throughout creation, why is worship through an image wrong, and how is bowing before Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji different?

The image and the living Guru

Bhagat Kabir Ji’s Bani is Gurbani within Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji. This Shabad confronts a gardener gathering leaves for an image.

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

The Shabad begins:

ਪਾਤੀ ਤੋਰੈ ਮਾਲਿਨੀ ਪਾਤੀ ਪਾਤੀ ਜੀਉ ॥
ਜਿਸੁ ਪਾਹਨ ਕਉ ਪਾਤੀ ਤੋਰੈ ਸੋ ਪਾਹਨ ਨਿਰਜੀਉ ॥੧॥
ਭੂਲੀ ਮਾਲਨੀ ਹੈ ਏਉ ॥
ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਜਾਗਤਾ ਹੈ ਦੇਉ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

Simple reading: Paatee torai maalinee paatee paatee jeeo.
Jis paahan kau paatee torai so paahan nirjeeo.
Bhoolee maalnee hai eo.
Satigur jaagtaa hai deo.

Plain meaning: The gardener plucks leaves, but every leaf has life. The stone for which she plucks them is lifeless. In this the gardener is mistaken; the True Guru is the living Divine Lord.

Reference: Aasa, Bhagat Kabir Ji, Panna 479. Continuous excerpt: opening stanza and Rahao, the central refrain; read with all five stanzas. [2]

The Shabad calls this worship a mistake. The gardener tears living leaves to serve lifeless stone. Bhagat Kabir Ji questions her through the divine forms familiar to her: the leaves are Brahma’s form, the branch Vishnu’s and the flower Shiva’s. If she destroys these three before her eyes, whose service is she doing?

The Shabad then turns to the carver who placed a foot on the image’s chest while shaping it. If this were the real deity, it would have devoured the carver. The food offering exposes the image’s helplessness. Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s commentary, Darpan, explains that the priest eats it; the image receives none. The Rahao directs the gardener to the True Guru. The closing stanza attributes freedom from this error to the Creator’s grace. [2]

The Swaminarayan organisation BAPS describes murti pratishtha, the consecration of an image, as prescribed prayers and rites through which God is invoked. Its explanation says that divinity enters the image, making it “a living form of God”. [3]

Swami Tapovan Maharaj offers a different explanation in Chinmaya Mission’s archive. Worship through a river or stone image gives the mind a concrete form through which to turn towards the Divine. It prepares the seeker for recognising all as Brahman, the supreme reality. Knowledge of Brahman is the final means of liberation in that account. [4]

Neither consecration nor the promise of preparation answers the Shabad’s rejection. The worshipper is directed away from the image and towards the True Guru. I reject image worship because I receive that teaching from Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji. To keep the image as a religious aid and call it a step towards the Guru would reverse the direction of the Shabad. [2]

What cleanses the person?

Before the Greenwich ceremony, Chinmaya Mission UK told Asian Voice that Mother Ganga could be invoked wherever a devotee may be, through mantra, or sacred recitation, and devotion. The stated aim was not “to suggest that one river can stand in for another”. The Mission’s later report also describes Ganga as a symbol of the flow of knowledge. [1]

The claim that the Ganga removes sin is set out in Swami Tapovan Maharaj’s The Glory of Sri Gangottari, published in the Mission’s archive. Its English rendering says: “Even a touch of the breeze sanctified by her waters can wash away one’s sins.” [4]

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s Shabad on Panna 358 addresses cleansing directly. Darpan explains its setting through funeral practices involving a lamp for the departed and remains taken to the Ganga. In the Shabad, Naam, the Divine Name, is the lamp and enduring support. The soul’s bathing is in praise:

ਗੰਗ ਬਨਾਰਸਿ ਸਿਫਤਿ ਤੁਮਾਰੀ ਨਾਵੈ ਆਤਮ ਰਾਉ ॥
ਸਚਾ ਨਾਵਣੁ ਤਾਂ ਥੀਐ ਜਾਂ ਅਹਿਨਿਸਿ ਲਾਗੈ ਭਾਉ ॥੩॥

Simple reading: Gang Banaaras sifat tumaaree naavai aatam raau.
Sachaa naavan taan theeai jaan ahinis laagai bhaau.

Plain meaning: Your praise is my Ganga and my Banaras, and in it my soul bathes. The true bathing happens only when love for You stays through day and night.

Reference: Aasa, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Panna 358. Complete stanza 3, read with the Shabad and its Rahao. [5]

The second line explains what makes this bathing true: love of the One continues through day and night. The Sikh is being taught where to turn for support in life and death. Naam is that support. Praise gives voice to love for the One beyond the end of a ceremony. The closing stanza speaks of the One’s gift that never runs out.

Gurbani rejects the claim that contact with the Ganga removes sin. Guru Sahib locates cleansing in praise and continuing love of the One. Treating the river as the source of that cleansing gives water a power the Shabad does not give it. Invoking Ganga beside the Thames does not change the teaching. A Sikh can protect both rivers without worshipping either. [5]

The Aarti Sikhs sing

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s Aarti on Panna 663 turns the worshipper from the lamp ceremony to the Creator’s Aarti throughout nature. The sky is the tray; the sun and moon are lamps, the wind is the ceremonial whisk, and all vegetation forms the offering of flowers. The Rahao marvels at the Aarti already taking place. Darpan explains this as a rejection of circling lamps in worship. [6]

The next stanza speaks of thousands of eyes and forms, while declaring the One without eyes or form. The Shabad goes on to name the same Light in all and explain how it is recognised:

ਗੁਰ ਸਾਖੀ ਜੋਤਿ ਪਰਗਟੁ ਹੋਇ ॥
ਜੋ ਤਿਸੁ ਭਾਵੈ ਸੁ ਆਰਤੀ ਹੋਇ ॥੩॥

Simple reading: Gur saakhee jot pargat hoi.
Jo tis bhaavai su aartee hoi.

Plain meaning: Through the Guru’s teaching the Light is revealed. Whatever pleases the One, that is Aarti.

Reference: Dhanasari, Mahalla 1, Aarti, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Panna 663. Closing two lines of stanza 3; the preceding lines are paraphrased above. [6]

Darpan explains this through accepting the Creator’s Raza, the Divine will, and walking in it. The presence of the One in creation is not permission to consecrate its objects and worship them. The Shabad joins recognising the Divine Light to learning from the Guru and living in the One’s will. To sing this Shabad while presenting lamp-circling as its teaching contradicts that direction. [6]

Bhagat Ravidas Ji names the offering:

ਨਾਮੁ ਤੇਰੋ ਆਰਤੀ ਮਜਨੁ ਮੁਰਾਰੇ ॥
ਹਰਿ ਕੇ ਨਾਮ ਬਿਨੁ ਝੂਠੇ ਸਗਲ ਪਾਸਾਰੇ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

Simple reading: Naam tero aartee majan Muraare.
Har ke Naam bin jhoothe sagal paasaare.

Plain meaning: Your Naam is my Aarti and bathing, O Murari. Without Hari’s Naam, all these displays are false.

Reference: Dhanasari, Bhagat Ravidas Ji, Panna 694. Complete Rahao, read with all four stanzas. [7]

Hari and Murari address the One here. The following stanzas make Naam the lamp, wick, oil and garland. The closing offering is Sat Naam, the True Name. Everything we might bring already belongs to the Creator. Even flowers offered as untouched have been visited by bees, as Darpan explains. [7]

Naam is the Name of the One we remember and praise. Bhagat Ravidas Ji offers that remembrance, turning towards the One who has already given everything. A Sikh singing this Shabad is called to make the same offering, not simply to rename the contents of a tray. The prayer remains full of devotion even as the ceremonial materials give way to it.

Bhagat Sain Ji’s Shabad on Panna 695 raises a difficulty because its opening names incense, lamps and ghee (clarified butter). The English translation by Dr Sant Singh Khalsa, displayed at SriGranth, presents the opening as a material offering. Darpan reads the next line’s declaration of devotion as the offering itself, and the One addressed in stanza 2 as the lamp and pure wick. [8]

I follow that reading because the Rahao speaks of joy through the Creator’s grace, and the closing stanza calls for remembrance. Read together, the lines express devotion through the ceremony’s imagery; they do not direct the Sikh to circle a physical lamp.

The same teaching inside the Gurdwara

Darpan’s closing note on the Panna 479 Shabad confronts Sikhs with the same error. Professor Sahib Singh Ji describes a practice being introduced in his own time: bringing a food tray before Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji and having bhog performed as a food-offering rite. The note asks whether giving the Guru the status of a murti is disrespectful and calls for vigilance. Treating the Guru as an image that must be fed is not reverence. [2]

Bhog also names the completion of a Paath, a reading of Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Karah prashad, the sweet food shared with the congregation, is prepared and presented according to its prescribed maryada and distributed after Ardas. The criticism here concerns treating the Guru as an image to be fed. [9]

The Sikh Rehat Maryada expressly rejects lamp-and-incense Aarti and food offerings before Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Article V(d) permits lamps for light and incense for fragrance; it prohibits their use in the offering ceremony. Where Sikhs perform the prohibited offerings, the practice conflicts with the discipline as well as the Shabad. [9]

Claims about a Sikh sarovar, or pool, must be examined with the same care. In the same English translation, Guru Arjan Sahib Ji’s Shabad on Panna 625 describes bathing in a tank and having sins erased. Darpan reads Ramdaas sarovar as the congregation of the One’s servants, where Naam flows. [10]

I follow Darpan because the Rahao centres on reflection upon Shabad. The closing stanza names Sadh Sangat, the company of those devoted to the One, together with Divine help and remembrance of Naam. A reading that retains a physical sarovar must still explain those lines. To promise that a dip alone removes sin is to leave out the Shabad’s teaching about the Guru, Sangat and Naam.

Why, then, does a Sikh bow before Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji? Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji states:

ਬਾਣੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੁਰੂ ਹੈ ਬਾਣੀ ਵਿਚਿ ਬਾਣੀ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤੁ ਸਾਰੇ ॥
ਗੁਰੁ ਬਾਣੀ ਕਹੈ ਸੇਵਕੁ ਜਨੁ ਮਾਨੈ ਪਰਤਖਿ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਿਸਤਾਰੇ ॥੫॥

Simple reading: Baanee Guroo Guroo hai Baanee vich Baanee amrit saare.
Gur Baanee kahai sevak jan maanai partakh Guroo nistaare.

Plain meaning: Bani is Guru, and the Guru is present in Bani. Within Bani is Amrit, the life-giving nectar of Naam, which the Sikh holds in the heart. The Guru speaks Bani, the servant accepts it with faith, and the Guru assuredly carries the servant across.

Reference: Nat, Mahalla 4, Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji, Panna 982. Complete stanza 5, read with the whole Shabad and its Rahao. [11]

A Sikh comes before the Guru to be taught, not before an image made sacred by a ceremony. Bowing expresses that relationship. It cannot replace listening or accepting correction. Rejecting image worship gives us no reason to reduce the present Guru to a book alone. [11]

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s Aarti ends in longing for the sweetness of the One’s lotus feet. Guru Sahib prays in the voice of the thirsty rain bird, asking for grace to remain in Naam. [6]

The Aarti we sing calls us to praise, love and dependence on the One. Teaching image worship or sacred-water cleansing as another way to follow these Shabads misrepresents them. I cannot receive these Shabads as the Guru’s teaching and then commend the practices they reject, whether those practices are performed beside the Thames or inside a Gurdwara.

Sources

The quoted Gurmukhi and complete Shabad contexts were checked at SriGranth with Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Sri Guru Granth Sahib Darpan on 8 October 2026. The published institutional sources were consulted on the same date. The English meanings follow Darpan and are learning aids. Differing readings of Pannas 625 and 695 are identified above. Errors will be corrected, with a dated note in this section.

[1] Chinmaya Mission, report of the ceremony, 14 September 2026, identifying Chinmaya Mission UK and Totally Thames as partners; Old Royal Naval College programme; Subhasini Naicker, organisers’ explanation in Asian Voice, 2 September 2026. Published accounts, not eyewitness evidence from the author or proof of every attendee’s beliefs.

[2] Bhagat Kabir Ji, Aasa, Panna 479, complete Shabad ending 5.1.14; Darpan, including the closing note on Sikh food offerings.

[3] BAPS, Murti Pratishtha, opening explanation. The organisation’s account of consecration.

[4] Swami Tapovan Maharaj, The Glory of Sri Gangottari, Chinmaya Archives. The quotation follows the archive’s free-flowing English translation; see also “Rewards of Pilgrimage”. The Sanskrit was not independently examined.

[5] Aasa, Mahalla 1, Panna 358, Deevaa meraa ek naam, complete Shabad ending 4.2.32; Darpan, including the funeral-practice context.

[6] Dhanasari, Mahalla 1, Aarti, Panna 663, complete Shabad; Darpan. This essay follows Panna 663, not the parallel text on Panna 13.

[7] Bhagat Ravidas Ji, Dhanasari, Panna 694, complete Aarti ending 4.3; Darpan.

[8] Bhagat Sain Ji, Dhanasari, Panna 695, complete Shabad ending 4.2; Darpan, including the discussion of the lamp-offering objection.

[9] Sikh Rehat Maryada, English reproduction at the Sikh Missionary Society: Article V(d)–(f), worship and reverence; XI(a), conclusion of Paath; XII(a)–(c), karah prashad. For bhog as the conclusion of a reading, see Punjabi University’s dictionary entry at Punjabipedia.

[10] Sorath, Mahalla 5, Panna 625, complete Shabad beginning Raamdaas sarovar naate, ending 2.1.65; Darpan. Both readings discussed above remain checkable.

[11] Nat, Mahalla 4, Panna 982, complete stanza 5, read within the full Shabad ending 8.4; Darpan.

To follow on 15 October 2026: Who Decides What Bhagat Bani Means? This companion study examines the Aarti Shabads and disputed readings.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

Suppose a young Sikh in Britain asks an online search service about Guru Nanak Sahib Ji and receives an answer that presents Guru Sahib as a northern Indian religious teacher and reformer. The answer offers a setting and a description of Guru Sahib’s work. It has not yet explained why Sikhs receive Guru Nanak Sahib Ji as Guru, or what Guru Sahib says about the source of Bani, the Guru’s Word.

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji names the source of Bani:

ਜੈਸੀ ਮੈ ਆਵੈ ਖਸਮ ਕੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਤੈਸੜਾ ਕਰੀ ਗਿਆਨੁ ਵੇ ਲਾਲੋ ॥

Simple reading: jaisee mai aavai khasam kee baanee taisarraa karee giaan ve laalo.

Plain meaning: As Bani comes to me from the Master, so I make it known, O Lalo.

Tilang, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Panna 722. Opening-line excerpt; this Shabad (a composition of Gurbani) continues onto Panna 723. [1]

The first thing a history would miss is Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s own answer to a question any account of Guru Sahib’s teaching has to ask: where did this teaching come from? Historians can examine the surroundings, the religious currents of the time, the politics, Guru Sahib’s travels and possible encounters. That work is real and worth doing. But in this passage Guru Nanak Sahib Ji answers the question directly. As the Bani comes to me from the Master, Guru Sahib says, so I make it known. A reader can take that claim as true or hold back from it. I receive this as revelation. A historian cannot leave it out and then present the surroundings as the whole answer, because once the line is dropped, the reader never hears the account that challenges the historian’s explanation. [1]

And Guru Sahib says this while describing an invasion. The next line says a marriage party of sin has come from Kabul and is demanding the gift by force. The Shabad then describes what that meant for the people underneath it. Muslim women reading their scripture in agony and crying out to God. Hindu women, high caste and low, suffering on the same account. Wedding songs replaced by songs of blood, blood where the saffron should be. Guru Sahib addresses Lalo, line after line, the way you tell the truth to someone you trust. Lose the passage and you lose Guru Sahib’s account of what the invasion did to the people caught in it. [1]

I think the account of suffering matters most for what it shows about Guru Nanak Sahib Ji. Look at those for whom Guru Sahib grieves. Muslim women are named before Hindu women. The judgement falls on what people are doing to one another, not on a community. Nor does the praise make the suffering smaller. Guru Sahib names it in full. The Shabad speaks of the One who created the world and drew it into worldly attachment, yet remains apart, watching. Guru Sahib still says the Master is true and the Master’s justice is true, singing the praise of the One in what the Shabad calls the city of corpses. Everything is kept. Nothing is softened to make the rest easier. A history that leaves this out lets the reader imagine Guru Nanak Sahib Ji at a safe distance from the world. The passage does not allow that picture. This teaching confronted the worst that people do. [1]

There is one more loss, and it reaches into the later history of the Gurus. The passage judges power itself. It speaks of the invaders coming and going, names the years, and says another will rise. Guru Nanak Sahib Ji was already judging conquest and the rule it imposed. That matters when the story moves on. Whether the two swords of 1606 and the Khalsa of 1699 were a change of character or a working out of the same authority cannot be judged without hearing how Guru Nanak Sahib Ji judges conquest and speaks of its victims. [1, 3]

The Guru in the history

Sidh Gosht makes the relationship between Guru and disciple explicit:

ਸਬਦੁ ਗੁਰੂ ਸੁਰਤਿ ਧੁਨਿ ਚੇਲਾ ॥

Simple reading: sabad guroo surat dhun chelaa.

Plain meaning: Shabad is the Guru; the consciousness attuned to it is the disciple.

Ramkali, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Sidh Gosht, pauri 44 (stanza 44), Panna 943. One-line excerpt; the pauri continues. [2]

The attention described here is joined to Shabad, the Guru’s Word, rather than valued simply for being steady. The pauri speaks of the Guru through the ages and of overcoming haumai, self-centredness, through Shabad. As a Sikh, I come before Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji as the present Guru. [2]

Bani is direct evidence of the Gurus’ teaching, not a continuous biography or a record of every event.

The same responsibility applies to me. Calling my interpretation Shabad-led does not make it correct. The wording, grammar and surrounding passage must support it. If I love the Guru, I must also be willing to be corrected by the Guru.

What changes when Bani is included

The two swords provide a particular example. The Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee’s account records the succession from Guru Arjan Sahib Ji to Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji in 1606 and Guru Sahib’s wearing of the swords associated with Piri and Miri. It says: “Now the Sikh nation adopts both spiritual and political ways simultaneously.” The succession is recorded in the account’s preceding paragraph. The sentences before the quoted one describe a change forced by circumstances and the need to counter imperial power. [3]

Read that statement beside Ramkali Ki Vaar, a composition in ballad form, on Pannas 966–967. Rai Balwand and Satta describe Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s rule founded on Truth, the succession to Guru Angad Sahib Ji, and the same Light and way continuing. The Vaar’s language of rule concerns Guruship; it does not establish a territorial state or an army under Guru Nanak Sahib Ji. [3]

In its context, “Now” marks the policy change the account is describing; it does not show that the writer denies succession. The risk is that readers mistake the beginning of organised armed defence for the beginning of the Guru’s authority over shared Sikh life. The Vaar had already described the Guru’s rule, and the Tilang Shabad had already judged conquest. A history must explain the new means of defence under that continuing authority, rather than let the military change supply the whole explanation. [1, 3]

The same attention to the source also limits claims made in defence of Sikhi. The Bani of Bhagat Kabir Ji, like that of Rai Balwand and Satta, is received within Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji as Gurbani under the same Guru. Bhagat Kabir Ji’s Bani uses khaalse on Panna 655. Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Gurbani commentary, Darpan, explains the word as free, within a Shabad about loving devotion and release from the fear of death. The shared word alone does not establish that the passage describes the initiation of 1699. Nor does the later institution determine what the earlier Shabad means. [4]

Miri remains answerable to the Guru

Piri names spiritual authority; Miri concerns responsibility and authority in worldly affairs. I understand Miri as responsibility exercised under the Guru, not as an independent right to do whatever secures power. That is why the distinction between institutional change and a new source of authority matters beyond the history of the two swords.

I reject the claim that Piri without Miri becomes powerless idealism. A failure to organise protection, or to support someone in need, lies with the people and institutions responsible. It does not establish a defect in the Guru’s authority. Sikhs still have to build the means to act together. Prayer and devotion do not excuse leaving that work undone, while success in a political struggle cannot make an action right by itself.

The distinction also matters for present institutions. In 2016, the Parliament of India amended the electoral provisions of the Sikh Gurdwaras Act 1925. Sikh leaders have influenced legislation and sometimes secured changes, but that does not mean Sikh institutions held the final power to make, prevent or reverse those amendments. Holding an office under that law does not, by title alone, make its holder the religious authority for Sikhs worldwide. [5]

My separate study proposes an orderly transition to representative Sikh institutions answerable to Sikhs under Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, with safeguards for property, staff and charitable work under ordinary civil law. Asking institutions to serve better must include asking how their leaders are chosen, challenged and replaced. [5]

So the real cost is not a missing quotation. It is a history in which the reader hears everyone’s account of Guru Nanak Sahib Ji except Guru Sahib’s own, and never learns how the Bani met the suffering of the time head-on.

Sources

Gurmukhi lines, locations and passage readings were checked against SriGranth and Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan to 6 October 2026. The English meanings are learning aids. Errors will be corrected publicly with a dated note.

[1] Tilang, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Pannas 722–723, complete Shabad. Darpan explains the context and Divine apartness as remaining unattached.

[2] Ramkali, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Sidh Gosht, pauri 44, Panna 943. Darpan explains the relationship between Shabad and the disciple’s attention.

[3] Delhi Sikh Gurdwara Management Committee: Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji, read with its surrounding account. Rai Balwand and Satta, Ramkali Ki Vaar, pauris 1–2, Pannas 966–967; Darpan 966 and 967.

[4] Sorath, Bhagat Kabir Ji, complete Shabad, Pannas 654–655. Darpan’s discussion explains khaalse within the Shabad’s account of loving devotion and freedom.

[5] Sikh Gurdwaras (Amendment) Act 2016, No. 21 of 2016, sections 1(2), 2–3; retrospective commencement, 8 October 2003. Gazette, 6 May 2016, hosted by PRS. Wider context and proposal: Amended by Empire, Province and Parliament. Never by the Panth., 28 July 2026; evidence date 27 July 2026.

Related: The Khalsa Stands Under the Same Guru · The Khalsa Was Already in the Granth

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

Borrowing from Europe is not the objection. The concern is how the ideas were used to organise society and assign a place within it to Sikhs and other communities.

For a Sikh, another question comes first: what governs religious understanding? In Sidh Gosht, the Siddhas ask Guru Nanak Sahib Ji about his Guru and discipleship.

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji answers:

ਸਬਦੁ ਗੁਰੂ ਸੁਰਤਿ ਧੁਨਿ ਚੇਲਾ ॥

Simple reading: sabad guroo surat dhun chelaa.

Plain meaning: The Shabad is my Guru; my consciousness, attuned to it, is the disciple.

Reference: Ramkali, Mahalla 1, Sidh Gosht, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, stanza 44, Panna 943. One-line excerpt. [2]

The stanza continues through contemplation of the One and the overcoming of haumai, self-centredness. Its subject is discipleship, not a modern constitutional arrangement. Historical research establishes what political writers proposed; their proposals do not thereby become the Guru’s account of Sikh meaning. [2]

The writers and their European sources

Vinayak Damodar Savarkar supplied an influential formulation of Hindutva in 1923. Keshav Baliram Hedgewar founded the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, or RSS, in 1925. Madhav Sadashivrao Golwalkar, known within the movement as “Guruji”, became its second chief in 1940. [3–5]

Savarkar drew upon Tilak, Maratha history, Shivaji and Indian religious literature. His memorial organisation also records his close study of Giuseppe Mazzini, the Italian revolutionary nationalist. After arriving in England in 1906, he translated selected Mazzini writings into Marathi and added a substantial introduction. The first edition appeared in June 1907. [6]

Historian Vikram Visana identifies Savarkar’s adaptation of Mazzini and the state theorist Johann Kaspar Bluntschli. His study distinguishes that earlier work from the later Hindutva formulation, reading the 1909 account of the uprising of 1857 as an argument for popular sovereignty through Hindu–Muslim unity. [7]

The Fascist institutions Moonje later studied were a different model from Mazzini’s revolutionary nationalism. Historian Marzia Casolari, who describes Moonje as Hedgewar’s mentor, reproduces his accounts of the Balilla and Avanguardisti, Fascist youth organisations, and his meeting with Mussolini on 19 March 1931. He subsequently referred to German youth movements as well as the Italian organisations when he told The Mahratta:

“I think they are eminently suited for introduction in India, adapting them to suit the special conditions.” [1]

Casolari dates Moonje’s preparatory work for the Central Hindu Military Education Society and the Bhonsala Military School to 1934. In his scheme for educating and organising Hindu boys, Italian youth organisations appeared as practical models for paramilitary training. [1]

The RSS already existed when Moonje made his visit, and he described it as independently conceived. His interest in Fascist methods is evidence of proposed borrowing, not an Italian founding of the organisation. [1]

Persecution offered as a lesson

Golwalkar’s 1939 We, or Our Nationhood Defined contains an approving discussion of Nazi Germany’s treatment of Jews. After describing their persecution in the name of racial purity, he calls Germany’s example:

“a good lesson for us in Hindusthan to learn and profit by”. [8]

What the passage commended was persecution, not simply national organisation. It was wrong in 1939 and remains wrong. The passage approved persecution already occurring, before the later Nazi programme to murder Europe’s Jews. [5, 8]

The same book prescribed assimilation into a Hindu national identity for communities it designated foreign. Those who retained a separate identity were to live in subordination, without citizenship rights. No person’s safety or equal standing should depend on surrendering a religious identity. [8]

In 2006, The Times of India reported that the RSS had disowned the book as representative of its position or Golwalkar’s mature thinking. Former spokesperson M. G. Vaidya endorsed that distancing. The report also carried the claim that the book was an abridgement of a work by G. D. Savarkar, V. D. Savarkar’s elder brother, known as Babarao. The later distancing does not change what the 1939 text commended. [9]

How the Sikh was classified

In Savarkar’s formulation, Hindutva extended beyond religious belief to territory, ancestry and culture. India had to be both the fatherland of ancestral belonging and the holy land from which the community’s sacred traditions arose. [5]

The definition included Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists, while placing Muslims and Christians outside it because their principal sacred origins lay elsewhere. It made sacred geography a test of national belonging, although this could not establish an individual’s loyalty. [5]

His treatment of Sikhs is explicit. On printed page 113 of the 1923 edition, he writes:

“Let the Sikhs be classed as Sikhs religiously; but as Hindus racially, nationally and culturally.” [3]

The surrounding discussion acknowledges Sikh objections and allows rejection of Vedic religious authority. Even so, Sikhs are to remain Hindu racially, nationally and culturally. Their religious difference is accepted within a larger identity whose terms Savarkar supplies. Calling that identity national rather than religious changes the kind of claim being made; it does not establish its authority over Sikhs. [3]

Bhai Kahn Singh Nabha had already defended a distinct Sikh identity in Ham Hindu Nahin in 1898, twenty-five years before Savarkar published this formulation. The book establishes that a distinct Sikh position had been articulated; it cannot establish the views of every Sikh. [3, 10]

A writer can admire Sikh courage and honour the Gurus while placing their teaching within a national story defined on other grounds. Respectful language does not settle whether the interpretation is faithful to the Guru’s teaching.

From national identity to education

The RSS’s 2017 FAQ describes Hindu as a national rather than sectarian identity, allowing different religious affiliations within it. It also describes the daily shakha, or local gathering, as combining exercise, patriotic songs, discussion and prayer. [4]

In Panjab, Jitender Veer Sarvhitkari Model Senior Secondary School, Sector 71, Mohali, is managed by Sarvhitkari Educational Society, identified on the school’s website as Vidya Bharati’s state unit. The website reproduces the Vidya Bharati mission of developing a generation:

“committed to Hindutva and infused with patriotic fervour”. [11]

Alongside that commitment, the mission calls for intellectual, physical and spiritual development, service to disadvantaged people and relief from social injustice. It appears under “Vidya Bharati Mission”, separately from the school’s shorter “Our Mission” statement. [11]

To establish how this mission is taught, we would need to examine textbooks and classroom materials. The statement alone cannot show what every teacher says or pupil believes. In lessons about Sikh history, accurate dates and respectful mention of the Gurus may coexist with a disputed political classification. The sources used to explain Sikh identity therefore matter, as does whether the lesson represents Sikh self-understanding and distinguishes the Guru’s teaching from the later classification.

Separately documented violence

Human Rights Watch’s investigations provide separate evidence about violence linked to Hindu nationalist mobilisation. They concern particular campaigns and conduct, rather than consequences that can simply be deduced from a 1923 text, and neither report is evidence about the school discussed above. [12, 13]

The 1999 investigation of attacks on Christians documented church destruction, assaults and coerced conversions to Hinduism in Gujarat’s Dangs district. It also recorded denials of organisational involvement by officials and representatives of the organisations concerned. [12]

Human Rights Watch’s 2019 report on cow-protection violence recorded at least 44 deaths, including 36 Muslims, across twelve states between May 2015 and December 2018. Through eleven detailed cases, it examined attacks, political connections and failures of police response. [13]

The translations, recorded visits and educational plans show a modern political movement being shaped through Indian and European sources. Presenting this as the recovery of an unchanged ancient teaching would leave those choices unexplained. Its definitions of belonging remain the work of political authors, open to examination on their content and consequences. [1, 6, 7]

Sikhi is its own religion, and Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji remains Guru. In Sidh Gosht, the consciousness is formed through Shabad and the fire of haumai is overcome. That discipleship gives me no licence to turn this examination into hatred of Hindu people, nor does it require surrender to another writer’s definition. A political classification does not become the Guru’s teaching simply because it includes the Sikh. [2, 10]

Related work

Ham Hindu Nahin: What It Still Means · Which “Hindu” Do You Mean? · Should a Sikh Sing Vande Mataram?

Verify

The Gurbani quotation is a one-line excerpt from Sidh Gosht, stanza 44, Panna 943, read with the preceding questions in stanza 43 on Panna 942. Savarkar’s Sikh classification appears on printed page 113 of the May 1923 edition. Golwalkar’s Germany discussion and minority prescription occur in chapters III and V respectively. Casolari’s discussion of Moonje’s military-education plans follows her account of his Italian visit.

Cross-check

Checked to 5 October 2026. Every check listed here was carried out again on 5 October 2026, rather than merely carried forward from the 23 September review. The Gurbani wording and complete stanzas 43–44 were checked at SriGranth, with Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan commentary displayed there. The 1923 title page and printed pp. 110–113 of Savarkar’s Hindutva were visually re-examined: page 113 contains “nationally” and a semicolon after “religiously”. Casolari’s youth-movement passage and account of the 1934 preparatory work were reread. Golwalkar’s passages were checked in the named electronic transcription and against [5]. The school’s mission statements, Vidya Bharati link and CBSE entry were checked, as were the relevant Human Rights Watch findings. Source limitations are specified below.

Correction note

Errors in wording, attribution, interpretation or historical evidence will be corrected with a dated note.

Source note

This study distinguishes documented intellectual borrowing, organisational statements and separately investigated conduct. The educational example establishes a published mission, not the beliefs of every pupil. The minority-violence findings retain the periods and attribution of the cited investigations. The English rendering of Gurbani is a learning aid, following the contextual explanation in Darpan; it does not replace the Gurmukhi. The initial source review was recorded on 23 September 2026. All online references below were accessed or rechecked on 5 October 2026; the scope of consultation is stated in the individual notes.

[1] Marzia Casolari, “Hindutva’s Foreign Tie-Up in the 1930s: Archival Evidence”, Economic and Political Weekly, 35(4), 22 January 2000, pp. 218–228. Consulted the article reproduced on Academia.edu and Casolari’s “Hindutva’s Fascist Heritage”, hosted by SabrangIndia, 28 April 2016, especially “Moonje’s Plans for Militarising Hindus”. Diary, newspaper and programme extracts are taken from Casolari’s research; the original archival documents were not independently inspected. Casolari dates preparatory work to 1934 and spells the school “Bhonsla”. This article uses the institutional spelling “Bhonsala”. The school’s own “Heritage” account dates the society to 1935 and the Nashik school’s inauguration to 12 June 1937; these are distinct from the preparatory work.

[2] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Ramkali, Mahalla 1, Sidh Gosht, stanzas 43–44, Panna 942 and Panna 943, SriGranth. Commentary: Professor Sahib Singh Ji, Sri Guru Granth Sahib Darpan, displayed alongside the text at SriGranth.

[3] V. D. Savarkar, writing as “A Maratha”, Hindutva, May 1923. Scanned edition hosted by Savarkar.org, title page and printed pp. 110–113. The quotation is on printed p. 113, within the scan’s 112–113 spread (PDF page 60); printed and PDF page numbers differ. The wording and punctuation were visually rechecked on 5 October 2026. A later online quotation at Pranasutra omits “nationally” and replaces the semicolon with a comma; the quotation here follows the 1923 printing.

[4] Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, “Basic FAQ on RSS”, 3 June 2017. Sections on the founder, shakha and Hindu national identity. Used as the organisation’s own account.

[5] Sammyh S. Khan, Ted Svensson, Yashpal A. Jogdand and James H. Liu, “Lessons From the Past for the Future: The Definition and Mobilisation of Hindu Nationhood by the Hindu Nationalist Movement of India”, Journal of Social and Political Psychology, 5(2), 2017, pp. 477–511. DOI: 10.5964/jspp.v5i2.736. A thematic analysis of Savarkar and Golwalkar, including national membership and exclusion.

[6] Savarkar memorial website, “Q & A”, 29 May 2017, account of Savarkar’s intellectual influences, the June 1907 Mazzini publication and his family, including his elder brother Ganesh Damodar, known as Babarao. The Marathi volume itself was not independently examined.

[7] Vikram Visana, “Savarkar before Hindutva: Sovereignty, Republicanism, and Populism in India, c.1900–1920”, Modern Intellectual History, 18(4), December 2021, pp. 1106–1129; first published online 5 November 2020. DOI: 10.1017/S1479244320000384. The publisher’s abstract and references were consulted; the attributed findings used here appear in the abstract.

[8] M. S. Golwalkar, We, or Our Nationhood Defined (Nagpur: Bharat Publications, 1939). Consulted electronic transcription hosted at sanjeev.sabhlokcity.com: chapter III, pp. 87–88; chapter V, pp. 104–105; preface, pp. 7–8. These page numbers belong to the re-typeset transcription, not the original printing. The passages were cross-checked against [5]. For the distinction between earlier Nazi persecution and the later systematic murder programme, see the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, “‘Final Solution’: Overview”.

[9] Akshaya Mukul, “RSS officially disowns Golwalkar’s book”, The Times of India, 9 March 2006. This is a contemporary report of the distancing and abridgement claim. Golwalkar’s preface in [8] names G. D. Savarkar’s Rashtra Meemansa as an inspiration and mentions a forthcoming English translation. No independent comparison with the complete Marathi work is claimed here. For G. D. Savarkar’s identity, see the family account in [6].

[10] “Kahn Singh”, The Sikh Encyclopedia, for the 1898 publication date. See also J. S. Grewal, “An Argument for Sikh Nationality: Nabha’s Ham Hindū Nahīn”, in History, Literature, and Identity: Four Centuries of Sikh Tradition (Oxford University Press, 2011), pp. 275–297; publisher’s abstract consulted. DOI: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198070740.003.0015.

[11] Jitender Veer Sarvhitkari Model Senior Secondary School, Sector 71, Mohali, school website, “Vidya Bharati Mission”, the separate “Our Mission” section and the footer identifying Sarvhitkari Educational Society as Vidya Bharati’s state unit, read on 5 October 2026. The institution’s name and managing society follow the CBSE SARAS record, affiliation 1631282. A dated text extract of the mission statements and network description was retained in the research record on 5 October 2026; it is not an independently hosted web archive. No classroom observation or pupil-belief study is claimed.

[12] Human Rights Watch, Politics by Other Means: Attacks Against Christians in India, vol. 11, no. 6(C), October 1999. See chapter IV, “Violence in Gujarat”, including the Dangs investigation and recorded denials.

[13] Human Rights Watch, Violent Cow Protection in India: Vigilante Groups Attack Minorities, February 2019. See Summary and Methodology for the dated totals, eleven detailed cases and scope of the investigation.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

The SGPC manages many historic gurdwaras, Sikh places of worship, and their property, funds and services. It does not manage every gurdwara in India or the world. The Sikh Gurdwaras Act 1925 also provides for local committees, whose elections require separate attention. [4]

The International Sikh Confederation (ISC) supplied a keynote by Dr Kashmir Singh, former Professor, Head and Dean of the Faculty of Law at Guru Nanak Dev University, for a discussion advertised for 28 September 2026 in Chandigarh. He records September 2011 as the last SGPC general election and 2005 as the last local committee elections. On that account, Sikhs who became eligible after 2011 have had no later SGPC general election in which to vote. His proposals raise a question beyond securing the next poll: what will prevent the same dependence returning? [1–2]

I support elections now, necessary interim safeguards and an orderly transition to Sikh self-management. I do not support another permanent Punjab Sikh Gurdwaras Act as the final settlement. Every route must explain which powers it changes, what it leaves behind and how people can correct failure. The test must extend to Sikhs outside one regional electorate and to those depending on institutional services.

These institutions serve a life under Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji: learning, remembrance, worship, service and responsibility towards others. Their management must protect that purpose.

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji says:

ਇਕਾ ਬਾਣੀ ਇਕੁ ਗੁਰੁ ਇਕੋ ਸਬਦੁ ਵੀਚਾਰਿ ॥

Simple reading: ikaa baanee ik gur iko sabad veechaar.

Plain meaning: There is one Bani, one Guru; reflect on the one Shabad.

Reference: Sorath Ki Vaar, Salok Mahalla 3, Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji, Panna 646, second Salok before Pauri 10. Opening line only. [3]

The complete Salok speaks of Guru-given grace and the enduring gain of Naam. It directs us towards the Guru, without prescribing a committee structure. Our arrangements are human proposals, open to correction. Neither governmental power nor a committee majority can govern Gurbani’s meaning.

What is being proposed

The ISC invitation lists early elections, amendments to the 1925 Act, returning responsibilities to Punjab and a possible new Punjab Sikh Gurdwara Act. Dr Kashmir Singh’s paper, Government Role in Gurdwara Management under the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925, considers three routes. His preference is a contribution to that discussion, not an adopted ISC policy. [1–2]

The first combines pressure on India’s Central Government to perform its existing duties with amendments securing future elections before the normal five-year period ends. He seeks action from the SGPC, Members of Parliament, the Punjab Assembly and political parties. [2, p. 7]

The second is a new Punjab Act. He draws on the Supreme Court’s Haryana judgment to support the Punjab Assembly’s power to make such a law, expects a nearer government to be more responsive, and sees an opportunity to repair defects. He also values a legislature in a Sikh-majority State. One seat each for Himachal Pradesh and Chandigarh would be chosen indirectly through important gurdwara managements there. [2, p. 7]

The third is autonomous Sikh management, meaning management by Sikhs themselves. He identifies this as the ideal but questions readiness, rivalry, enforcement, disputes and protection against domination or renewed government intervention. His conclusion favours the Punjab Act option in present circumstances. [2, p. 8]

The disagreement concerns the permanent arrangement. Useful immediate protections deserve examination. But each route must be judged both for failure to deliver its promise and for harmful consequences after it succeeds. An election can occur while dependence survives; repeal can occur without trusted representation.

What earlier settlements teach us

Sikh organisation preceded the 1925 Act. The SGPC’s retrospective account records its formation in November 1920 and a constitution-drafting committee the following month. The reform movement secured possession and management of gurdwaras and property for Sikh representatives. Yet section 144’s protection against State Government interference remained qualified by statutory powers. Recovering management and securing lasting freedom from political control were different achievements. [2,4–5]

The 1959 extension showed practical foresight through protections for existing committees, employees, assets, liabilities, contracts and proceedings associated with the Interim Gurdwara Board, Patiala. That preparation remains useful even as we examine who retained power over the governing arrangement. [4, ss. 148-C–148-E]

Reorganisation in 1966 placed institutions across new territorial boundaries. Section 72 of the Punjab Reorganisation Act continued relevant bodies, expressly including the SGPC, subject to Central directions until other provision was made by law. It fixed no automatic ending date. A transition lasting until a replacement is ready can therefore endure indefinitely; an automatic ending without a lawful replacement can disrupt services. Both risks require preparation. [6]

The dispute over voting qualifications supplies another lesson. In 2003 the Union Government removed the statutory Sehajdhari exception to the unshorn-hair voting condition by notification, following SGPC requests. The High Court struck down that executive measure in 2011, holding that the policy change required a legislature with the necessary powers. Its examination of the files also found inadequate consideration, while allegations of bad faith were not established. Parliament changed the law in 2016, giving it effect from an earlier date; the Supreme Court then disposed of the appeals, set aside their interim orders and left constitutional challenge open. [8–9]

The keynote predicts another decade of delay and registration of non-Sikhs if a challenge succeeds. Neither result is demonstrated there. A disputed voter qualification does not settle religious belonging; sound institutions must accommodate lawful challenge. [2, pp. 3–4]

Haryana’s separate Act, enacted in 2014 and upheld by the Supreme Court in 2022, brings the question of unity into focus. The SGPC defended common management. The Court examined legislative powers and management of Sikh gurdwaras within Haryana; it upheld the legislation after proceedings lasting nearly eight years with a temporary court order operating during that period. A judicial finding that a legislature may create a regional body does not answer whether the resulting arrangement adequately serves common Sikh responsibilities. [7]

These settlements secured gains while leaving other powers and dependencies unresolved. Some contained foresight; others involved failures of consideration. Before making the next choice, we should identify the powers retained, the people affected or excluded and the means of correction. An immediate success must be judged for what it leaves to the next generation.

Elections now, and the powers that remain

Sections 51 and 94 allow the relevant bodies to continue beyond five years until replacements are constituted. This protects continuity but supplies no fresh approval from voters. Existing managers retain information, spending and appointments while others cannot test their support through an election. Employees may become dependent on personal access, and younger Sikhs lose opportunities to learn institutional responsibility. [4]

Independent scrutiny can expose abuse but cannot provide the missing election. A public timetable should identify each obstacle, the authority responsible and the lawful remedy for failure. Continued delay is the baseline against which every proposed improvement must be judged.

An election could renew skills, open records and strengthen scrutiny without disrupting services. Safeguards must cover the whole process: the election authority and its resources, constituencies, voter lists, objections, polling, co-option of additional members by existing members, formal constitution of the Board and its first meeting. The keynote places constituency boundaries, the election date, appointment of the Chief Commissioner and formal constitution of the Board among Central Government functions. Each stage needs a named duty, adequate resources and an effective remedy for failure. A polling deadline alone leaves other points at which renewal can stall. [2, pp. 2–7]

Delayed renewal can gradually make the group already in charge harder to challenge. Control over records and appointments may outlast an individual president. An election can interrupt that pattern, but open accounts, access to information and fair complaints procedures are needed between elections as well. Changing the person in office cannot be the entire remedy.

Success also carries risks. A winning group might treat its victory as the end of reform while inheriting unchanged influence over funds and religious appointments. Representatives need limits appropriate to their duties; election to manage particular institutions does not authorise every claim made for Sikhs generally.

Seeking party manifesto commitments might secure attention, but could draw gurdwara management into State election bargaining. The demand should be for clear commitments from all relevant parties without offering institutional influence in return. [2, p. 7]

A public vacancy register would make another responsibility visible. Sections 53 and 96 provide election, co-option or nomination as applicable; the responsible bodies should explain each vacancy and any obstacle to filling it. Partial renewal must not substitute for general elections. [4]

Pending overdue elections, I propose restraint over avoidable decisions that are difficult to reverse. Safety, legal duties and essential services need exceptions, with published reasons and independent scrutiny. An absolute ban on contracts could obstruct repairs; a ban on removals could protect wrongdoing. The standard needs lawful implementation rather than being presented as a restriction the ISC can impose.

Would a new Punjab Act solve the dependence?

A new Punjab Act could remove opportunities for delay, separate conflicting functions and provide better remedies. The 2022 Haryana judgment supports the legislative powers of the States created by Panjab’s reorganisation within constitutional limits. That establishes who may legislate, not whether an unspecified future Punjab scheme would serve Sikh institutions well. [7]

The keynote supplies no draft showing which powers would end, be limited or remain. Relocating election and appointment controls from Delhi to Chandigarh could concentrate dependence locally. Removing particular discretionary powers would have different effects. The Punjab Government already has roles concerning the Judicial Commission, audits, local committees and certain by-laws. Combining these with further electoral powers requires scrutiny under an unhelpful successor government, not only a willing present one. [2, pp. 5–7]

The satkaar legislation makes this concern concrete. The Jaagat Jot Sri Guru Granth Sahib Satkar Act, 2008 restricted printing, publication, storage, distribution and supply to the SGPC or authorised bodies. The reproduced 2026 amending text adds a central register, custodial duties and stronger criminal provisions. Objections reported from Sri Akal Takht Sahib’s July letter concerned terminology, custody, identification and registration. The issue was how to punish deliberate beadbi, or sacrilege, without making the State the author of Sikh religious administration. Legislators’ Sikh identity did not prevent that disagreement. [13]

On 16 September 2026 the Punjab Government announced a seven-member committee to coordinate with the Takht’s committee and submit suggestions for government consideration. Consultation may secure correction, but its announcement does not establish that disputed provisions have changed. [13]

The Sikh Gurdwaras (Amendment) Bill, 2023 sought a free Gurbani broadcast feed from Sri Harmandir Sahib. The Governor’s office announced its reservation for presidential consideration on 6 December 2023. Assembly passage therefore did not complete that process. This dated example requires proponents to identify all decisions needed for a new Bill and protect institutions during delay; its present disposal status is not established here. [14]

Maharashtra’s proposed Takht Sachkhand Shri Hazur Abchalnagar Sahib Gurdwara Act, 2024 offers another test. Its official explanation described seventeen Sikh members, including three elected members, two from the SGPC and government appointees. In June 2026 ministers were reported to have paused further legislation for consultation. These are dated proposals, not a certified current composition. Sikh identity and independence of appointment remain different questions. [15]

Support for a Panjab-specific settlement might also strengthen political arguments for further regional separation. That is a possible consequence to assess, rather than a legal precedent created by Sikh endorsement. The proposed representation outside Panjab needs its own legal basis, clear selection arrangements and an explanation of whose concerns those places would carry.

A proposed law needs published provisions on elections, appointments, removals, finances, review and transfer. A review clause cannot alone prevent later amendment. Another permanent Sikh-specific statute is not my chosen destination: better regional administration would still leave special political control and worldwide shared responsibility unresolved.

Population and political power

The keynote’s reliance on a Sikh-majority State needs testing over time. The official 2001 summary gives Sikhs as 59.9 per cent of Panjab’s population; The Tribune’s report of the 2011 Census gives 57.7 per cent. These are dated proportions, not a current estimate or a forecast of minority status. They do not establish the separate effects of births, deaths, migration or reporting. A falling percentage need not mean a falling number of Sikhs. [10–11]

Population share, ordinary electoral participation, legislators’ identity and conduct, and gurdwara voter qualifications are different measures. Safeguards must work both with a stable Sikh share and with changed proportions, ages or geographical distribution. A continuing majority cannot guarantee independent religious judgement, while outdated constituencies can exclude people even without a change in the overall share.

Our preferred route faces changing participation and funding too. It must renew skills and representation beyond the founding generation, without relying permanently on a few wealthy overseas organisations. Old constituencies, language barriers and inaccessible registration can weaken participation under any legal form. Independence must not rest on the assumed goodwill of any demographic majority, including a Sikh majority. The purpose of this assessment is durable protection, never making migrants or another community an enemy.

One community beyond one electorate

Dr Kashmir Singh cites the SGPC’s 1970 request for elections conducted by the Punjab Government. Without the full resolution, that request cannot establish approval of every power a new permanent Act might confer. [2, p. 7]

Existing cross-regional links include Patna Sahib and Hazur Sahib office-holders and co-opted members under section 43-A. These links deserve recognition, but do not establish how Sikhs worldwide authorise decisions addressed to them. [4]

Sri Harmandir Sahib and Sri Akal Takht Sahib matter to Sikhs throughout India and across the world. Their significance extends beyond the SGPC’s regional electorate. The keynote offers limited representation beyond Panjab, but no process for Sikhs worldwide to choose representatives. [2, p. 7] A body addressing Sikhs generally must explain its wider authority; managing property, income and payroll does not itself supply it. A new Punjab Act would still need to answer that question.

Limited authority protects local responsibility as well. A gurdwara committee must manage staff, premises and services within its powers. A worldwide body should not acquire their ownership merely by declaring itself representative. Shared duties need agreed participation, published reasons and a credible route for objections. Those affected should know which Gurbani informed a religious instruction, who considered it, whom they represented and what force they claim for it. A majority vote cannot supply the meaning of Shabad. Cooperation in learning and assistance should not require smaller congregations to surrender their property or buy access through donations.

Repeal would not automatically change other Indian or overseas arrangements either. Common Sikh responsibility requires a credible process of its own. Neither a regional election nor registration of a new organisation can substitute for the work of deciding who may act, for whom and on what terms.

Self-management must restrain its own managers

Dr Kashmir Singh’s questions about readiness, disputes, enforcement and renewed government intervention deserve answers. My preferred route is orderly repeal of the 1925 Act and its amendments, appropriate general law for civil responsibilities, and Sikh-authored religious arrangements under Shabad Guru. Its credibility depends on how it would work. Removing particular government-held powers could give institutions greater freedom to choose and renew their managers, while separately authorised cooperation could serve responsibilities beyond a territorial electorate. [2]

His fear of Mahantship also tests the present system. Managers may treat institutions as their own when one circle retains appointments, funds and access without effective renewal. The historical and modern arrangements differ, but statutory status alone prevents neither domination nor misuse. The test is access to information, remedies and replacement of those responsible.

Those convening the first representative process need a published, limited task, disclosed interests and independent handling of objections. They must not choose alone who represents everyone or approve their own permanent authority. Selection needs credible checks without excluding smaller communities through procedures they cannot afford. Donations must not purchase representative places. Religious belonging, qualification for service and registration as a voter require separate consideration.

Before transfer, existing titles, restricted donations, debts, employment terms, pensions, contracts, archives and proceedings must be identified, with lawful holders and resources for every duty. The 1959 protections provide useful experience. Nobody should discover after repeal that two bodies dispute responsibility for paying them. Worshippers, employees, pensioners and people relying on essential services must be protected throughout. [4]

Civil arrangements already exist. The Charity Commission records Siri Guru Nanak Darbar in Gravesend as governed by a constitution adopted in 1984 and amended by a scheme in 2024. Alberta’s Siri Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara was incorporated under the Religious Societies’ Land Act. The Canadian case record also describes membership and election failures followed by court-ordered remedies: general law supports institutions without eliminating internal domination. A Sikkim High Court order identifies the Siliguri Sri Guru Singh Sabha’s registration under West Bengal’s societies legislation. [16–18]

Shergill v Khaira explains how English courts may enforce civil rights in religious associations without deciding religious truth; the appropriate Indian legal route still needs examination. Religious guidance, voluntary cooperation and binding civil duties must remain distinct. Joining a shared procedure cannot authorise a body to bind every Sikh. Property, employment and financial obligations need lawful enforcement. Internal review must never obstruct lawful reporting of abuse or fraud. [12]

A single worldwide treasury or appointment centre would increase the damage one captured body could cause. Separate local management and defined common duties limit that danger, but require agreed standards and dispute procedures. Negotiated legal change remains necessary: no gathering can repeal legislation by proclamation. Ordinary regulation and the possibility of later legislation would remain, making good administration, civil remedies and continued vigilance essential. Government agreement cannot be presumed, nor can freedom from every future pressure be promised. Negotiation must identify the authorities with power to act and the protections required before responsibility changes hands.

A course we can begin now

Immediate elections can accompany preparation for legal change. A staged approach offers renewal and better records while institutions continue serving people. Its particular danger is endless preparation: studies could consume resources while postponing decisions. It therefore needs safeguards against both premature transfer and a temporary arrangement becoming permanent.

In my response submitted on 19 September 2026, I asked the ISC to:

1. Press for SGPC and local committee elections now.

2. Seek a public vacancy register, with reasons why any seat cannot be filled.

3. Endorse restraint over avoidable, irreversible decisions pending overdue elections, and seek lawful implementation protecting safety, existing obligations and essential services.

4. Commission two connected studies, with published terms and a first report within six months of starting: one on legal transition and one on shared Sikh responsibility across India and the world.

5. Record the consequences before endorsing any route: the intended result, powers changed or retained, risks, who bears failure, safeguards and means of correction.

The ISC can seek answers, publish recommendations and bring people together. Responsible authorities must still perform their legal duties. A study must not delay elections, and filling vacancies must not replace general renewal.

The legal study should identify each function, its lawful successor, costs and continuity protections. The shared-responsibility study should establish what remains local, what requires cooperation, who participates and how decisions are explained and challenged. A transfer needs an accountable recipient; a representative process needs a lawful means to carry its duties.

The first report should lead to consultation in clear Panjabi and English, with other languages where needed. Women, younger Sikhs and smaller congregations must participate alongside established managers. Six months is a reporting period, not a repeal deadline. The work needs a disclosed budget, named responsibilities and adequate support. People with limited English, digital access or financial resources must have usable ways to contribute. Research groups should not acquire control of religious offices through the task of studying them.

Before transfer, independent review must establish that the legal basis, accountable successor, records, resources, services and complaint routes are ready. A temporary group must not decide by itself that it is ready or extend its own authority; any bridging law needs limited functions and a clear end, with lawful continuity prepared. Failure should lead to published reasons and correction of the failed step, while narrower voluntary cooperation can continue within the authority participants actually hold.

Progress should be examined through the next election cycle and across the following generation: do institutions renew participation, skills and funding without repeating the same struggle?

The consequences test applies equally to my proposal. The public should be able to see the intended gain, the costs and the powers being left to the next generation. Risks need remedies and named responsibilities; listing them is no substitute for action.

I therefore support elections now and a practical programme for self-management, with the same scrutiny of its risks as those of the alternatives. Dr Kashmir Singh has identified an urgent failure and put that ideal before the discussion. The work now is to make the alternative credible rather than leave it indefinitely beyond reach.

Sikhs should not have to choose between renewed representation today and institutions their children can hold to account tomorrow. The century’s record shows both what collective effort can recover and what an immediate victory can leave unresolved. Under the Guru, the work is to restore the opportunity to choose, protect those who depend on our institutions and place clear limits on the powers we leave to those who come after us.

Publication note

This article develops my independent response to Dr Kashmir Singh’s keynote, supplied by the ISC. I sent the response to Dr Birendra Kaur, Secretary General of the International Sikh Confederation, on 19 September 2026. The conclave was advertised for 28 September 2026. The submission remains a separate dated record; this article does not report an ISC decision or the meeting’s outcome.

Related work

This inquiry continues The New Mahants Hold the Gate, Amended by Empire, Province and Parliament. Never by the Panth, The Panth the Law Cannot See, and The State Can Punish Crime. It Must Not Define Satkaar. The earlier essays retain their own evidence dates. The 1959 continuity provisions examined here show why the historical record cannot support a blanket claim that earlier settlements lacked planning.

Verify

Read the complete six-line Salok on Panna 646, the second Salok before Pauri 10 in Sorath Ki Vaar. The quotation above is its opening line. The Salok speaks of Guru-given grace and Naam, not a prescribed system of management. Gurmukhi remains primary; the Roman reading and plain-English meaning are learning aids.

Cross-check

Checked to 20 September 2026, within the recorded scope. The source work of 18–19 September examined the complete Panna 646 Salok in SriGranth, Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan commentary and the containing Vaar heading on Panna 642, alongside the specified legal and historical sources. Focused checks on 20 September covered the 2011 judgment, charity metadata, the supplied invitation and related links. This public adaptation retains that source record and its stated limits. Its Gurmukhi, reading aid and plain meaning have been compared with the final journal manuscript and are unchanged. No new comprehensive legal audit or later meeting outcome is claimed. Outside sources do not determine Gurbani’s meaning.

Correction note

PanthSeva will correct material errors in quotation, interpretation, facts or references calmly, publicly and with a dated note. Specific corrections supported by the relevant passage or document are welcome.

Source note

[1] International Sikh Confederation, invitation No. ISC/Conclave2/Inv/2026/028, 7 September 2026. Supplied image: advertised date and agenda, not a record of subsequent resolutions.

[2] Dr Kashmir Singh, Government Role in Gurdwara Management under the Sikh Gurdwaras Act, 1925. Eight-page keynote supplied by the ISC: p. 1, history; pp. 2–6, functions and election account; pp. 7–8, options and conclusion. The original is not reproduced. No authorised public link was established in the source record; current-status assertions in the keynote are not independently certified here.

[3] Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, Sorath Ki Vaar, Salok Mahalla 3, Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji, Panna 646, second Salok before Pauri 10; containing Vaar heading, Panna 642. Complete Salok read with Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan. The excerpt, Roman reading aid and Gurjit Singh Sandhu’s plain-English meaning are unchanged. SriGranth, Panna 646 · Darpan, Panna 646 · SriGranth, Panna 642.

[4] Sikh Gurdwaras Act 1925, Ministry of Home Affairs-hosted consolidation: ss. 41, 43-A, 47, 51, 53, 62–63, 94, 96, 144 and 148-C–148-E. Specific structures and continuity provisions; not a consolidation of every later amendment. Vacancy applications require the relevant rules and orders. Act.

[5] SGPC, “About SGPC”, official retrospective history: formation and constitution-drafting arrangements, November–December 1920; not original meeting minutes. Institutional history.

[6] Punjab Reorganisation Act 1966, s. 72(1)–(3), official India Code text: continuity, Central directions and provision by subsequent law, expressly including the SGPC. India Code.

[7] Harbhajan Singh v State of Haryana and connected matters, Supreme Court, 20 September 2022, W.P.(C) 735/2014, paras. 19–20, 45–46 and 53–57. Legislative competence and interim history; not approval of an unspecified Punjab Bill. Judgment.

[8] Sehajdhari Sikh Federation v Union of India, Punjab and Haryana High Court, Full Bench, 20 December 2011, CWP 17771/2003, paras. 118–123. Executive powers, decision record, inadequate consideration and unproved bad faith. Judicial-text reproduction. Judicial text.

[9] Shiromani Gurdwara Prabandhak Committee v Sehajdhari Sikh Federation, Supreme Court, 15 September 2016, Civil Appeal 9334/2013 and connected appeals, paras. 5, 7–10. Retrospective amendment, disposal and challenge left open; no current finding on CWP 11978/2017. Judicial text · Parallel text.

[10] Census of India 2001, The First Report on Religion, “Sikhs”, official summary hosted by the Ministry of Statistics and Programme Implementation: Punjab share, 59.9 per cent. 2001 summary.

[11] Census 2011, C-01 Punjab, PC11_C01-03, official catalogue 11389. The official spreadsheet was not retrieved. The 57.7 per cent share is attributed to Sarbjit Dhaliwal, The Tribune, 27 August 2015, reporting the Census release; the article’s migration explanation is not adopted. Official catalogue · 2011 Census report.

[12] Shergill v Khaira [2014] UKSC 33, 11 June 2014, paras. 45–49. English civil-enforcement example; not an Indian transfer scheme. Judgment.

[13] Jaagat Jot Sri Guru Granth Sahib Satkar Act, 2008, ss. 3–5, reproduced by LatestLaws; 2026 amended-text reproduction at eCourtsIndia, ss. 3-A–3-B. The original Gazette and commencement instrument were not independently retrieved. The Times of India, 4 July 2026, reports objections; ANI and The Tribune, 16 September 2026, report consultation; SCC Times, 30 April 2026, describes registration and custodial duties. These reports do not establish later amendment or commencement. 2008 text · Amended-text reproduction · Objections reported · ANI report · Committee report · SCC Times report.

[14] Sikh Gurdwaras (Amendment) Bill, 2023: PRS Legislative Research Bill record; PTI, The Tribune, 6 December 2023, reporting reservation for presidential consideration. The present disposal position is unconfirmed. Bill record · Reservation reported.

[15] Maharashtra Directorate General of Information and Public Relations, Mahasamvad, 9 February 2024, explanation of the proposed Takht Sachkhand Shri Hazur Abchalnagar Sahib Gurdwara Act, 2024; Aditi Tandon, The Tribune, 27 June 2026, reporting a consultation hold. Dated proposals, not a certified current enacted composition. Official explanation · Consultation reported.

[16] Sri Guru Singh Sabha v State of Sikkim, Sikkim High Court, 1 December 2018, I.A. 11/2018 in W.P.(C) 49/2017. Opening petitioner description records West Bengal society registration and the Siliguri office; cited for registration only. Judicial text.

[17] Charity Commission for England and Wales, Siri Guru Nanak Darbar (Sikh Temple), Gravesend, charity 289430, “Governing document”. The official register’s indexed entry records a constitution adopted on 15 April 1984, as amended by a scheme dated 19 November 2024; the full governing instrument was not inspected. Charity register.

[18] Supreme Court of Canada, file 36426, Siri Guru Nanak Sikh Gurdwara of Alberta v Sakattar Singh Sandhu and Baldev Singh Hundle. Registrar’s summary records incorporation and the lower courts’ membership and election findings. Leave refused 13 August 2015; the summary is not a Supreme Court merits judgment. Case record.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

Summary

S. Karan Bir Singh Sidhu Ji uses Bhagat Kabir Ji’s Shabad to support his praise of the Ram Mandir at Ayodhya. He has written that Raam in Gurbani can mean God, present in all. Yet he joins that meaning to Ramchandra of Ayodhya without showing that the Shabad supports the connection. His reply accepted that my point was valid. The claim before readers remains unchanged. [1, 4]

Introduction

His article, “O Lord Ram, resolve this one paradox for me”: Bhagat Kabir, appeared on 23 January 2024, the day after the Ayodhya temple’s consecration ceremony. The June 2026 repost marks Kabir Jayanti, Bhagat Kabir Ji’s birth anniversary, but keeps the temple conclusion. I wrote to him after that repost to question it. [1, 4, 5]

1. What Sidhu Ji claims

His subtitle says the verses “present to the Almighty a simple yet deeply profound query”. The ending then turns to Ayodhya:

“This perspective is particularly relevant when gazing at the imposing grandeur of the Ram Mandir at Ayodhya. More than its physical splendor, the temple symbolizes a collective devotion and a spiritual awakening, mirroring the deeper truths that Kabir Ji’s hymns encapsulate. Thus, the Ram Mandir, in its essence, is not just a monumental structure but a testament to Lord Ram’s greater presence, resonating with the spiritual journey towards enlightenment and understanding of the devotee as well as of the entire civilization.” [1]

He is saying that the temple expresses the truth Bhagat Kabir Ji teaches. That is the claim he must prove from the Shabad.

His New Year 2024 article says the verses have “universal appeal, regardless of how one views Lord Ram”. He names the Prince of Ayodhya and an avatar of Vishnu, then adds “or, more profoundly, another name for Akal Purakh, the omniscient God”. Akal Purakh means the Timeless One. [1]

Sidhu Ji has therefore written that there are different meanings. The question is why he treats them as grounds for the same temple conclusion. Gurbani must decide whether that move is valid.

2. Who is Raam in this Shabad?

Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji gives the starting point. The Rahao, the centre of the Shabad, where the reader is asked to pause, says:

ਝਗਰਾ ਏਕੁ ਨਿਬੇਰਹੁ ਰਾਮ ॥
jhagraa ek niberahu raam.

ਜਉ ਤੁਮ ਅਪਨੇ ਜਨ ਸੌ ਕਾਮੁ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥
jau tum apne jan sau kaam. Rahao.

O Raam, resolve this one doubt, if You have any use for Your servant.

Gauri, Bani Bhagat Kabir Ji, Shabad 42, Panna 331. These are the complete opening Rahao lines; the Shabad continues. [2]

The first stanza asks:

ਇਹੁ ਮਨੁ ਬਡਾ ਕਿ ਜਾ ਸਉ ਮਨੁ ਮਾਨਿਆ ॥
ih man badaa ki jaa sau man maaniaa.

ਰਾਮੁ ਬਡਾ ਕੈ ਰਾਮਹਿ ਜਾਨਿਆ ॥੧॥
raam badaa kai raameh jaaniaa.

Is this mind greater, or the One in whom it has come to rest? Is Raam greater, or the one who has known Raam?

The complete first stanza of the same Shabad, Panna 331. The Shabad continues. [2]

The next stanza asks whether Brahma or the One who made him is greater, and whether the Veda or the source of its knowledge is greater. Professor Sahib Singh Ji explains Raam here as Prabh, God. The passage does not identify Raam as Dashrath’s son. [2]

Elsewhere, Bhagat Kabir Ji directly addresses the different uses of the name:

ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮ ਕਹਨ ਮਹਿ ਭੇਦੁ ਹੈ ਤਾ ਮਹਿ ਏਕੁ ਬਿਚਾਰੁ ॥
kabeer raam kahan meh bhed hai taa meh ek bichaar.

ਸੋਈ ਰਾਮੁ ਸਭੈ ਕਹਹਿ ਸੋਈ ਕਉਤਕਹਾਰ ॥੧੯੦॥
soee raam sabhai kaheh soee kautakhaar.

Kabir, there is a difference in saying Raam; understand this point. Everyone says Raam, and actors in religious plays use the same name.

Salok Bhagat Kabir Ji, Salok 190, Panna 1374. This is the complete Salok. The English sense follows Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s explanation of kautakhaar as performers of religious plays. [3]

The next Salok makes the distinction:

ਕਬੀਰ ਰਾਮੈ ਰਾਮ ਕਹੁ ਕਹਿਬੇ ਮਾਹਿ ਬਿਬੇਕ ॥
kabeer raamai raam kahu kahibe maahi bibek.

ਏਕੁ ਅਨੇਕਹਿ ਮਿਲਿ ਗਇਆ ਏਕ ਸਮਾਨਾ ਏਕ ॥੧੯੧॥
ek anekahi mil gaiaa ek samaanaa ek.

Kabir, keep remembering Raam, but distinguish carefully what you mean. One pervades countless beings; the other was present in one body.

Salok Bhagat Kabir Ji, Salok 191, Panna 1374. This is the complete Salok. The English sense follows Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s explanation. [3]

Bibek means telling one thing from another: knowing the difference. Professor Sahib Singh Ji explains the contrast as God, present in all, and Ramchandra, Dashrath’s son. The instruction is to distinguish them, not to treat the shared name as proof that they mean the same thing. [3]

Raam can refer to Ramchandra elsewhere in Gurbani. Here, the complete Shabad must settle the meaning. Sidhu Ji’s wish to bring traditions together cannot settle it instead.

3. What does the Shabad say about a religious place?

The Shabad ends with a question Sidhu Ji quotes but does not follow:

ਕਹਿ ਕਬੀਰ ਹਉ ਭਇਆ ਉਦਾਸੁ ॥
kahi kabeer hau bhaiaa udaas.

ਤੀਰਥੁ ਬਡਾ ਕਿ ਹਰਿ ਕਾ ਦਾਸੁ ॥੩॥੪੨॥
teerath badaa ki har kaa daas.

Kabir says: I am uncertain. Which is greater, the religious place or Hari’s servant?

Gauri, Bani Bhagat Kabir Ji, Shabad 42, Panna 331. These are the complete closing lines of stanza 3. Stanza 2 is not quoted in this article. [2]

Hari here means God. Professor Sahib Singh Ji explains tirath as a religious place, not only a pilgrimage destination. He explains that the place owes its importance to the devotee associated with it. His account of the whole Shabad points to the Satguru, the True Guru, through whom the seeker comes to know God. [2]

Sidhu Ji recognises that devotion matters more than outward ritual. But he still has to show why the Ayodhya temple meets that test. Public enthusiasm and a grand building do not establish spiritual awakening. His praise supplies the judgement that the teaching was meant to test. [1]

The same question applies to a gurdwara. Size, fame and public support cannot replace hearing and living the Guru’s teaching. Gurbani must be allowed to correct our judgement of a religious place, however much we admire it.

4. What his reply did not correct

In his reply to me, Sidhu Ji agreed that my point was valid. He said he was sharing earlier writing and defended an inclusive approach to religious traditions. He did not expressly accept every objection or promise to change the article. [4]

The earlier writing is relevant, but it does not answer the criticism. All three versions, from January 2024, June 2025 and June 2026, retain the temple conclusion. No correction addressing the objection appears beside it. [1]

Respect between religions does not require us to treat different meanings as the same. Sidhu Ji needs to answer the Shabad’s distinction, not simply state his wish for agreement between traditions.

The reader who opens his article does not see our exchange. That reader still receives his praise of Ayodhya as though Gurbani supports it. His reply to me has not corrected what everyone else is being told.

Conclusion

Sidhu Ji must show why he joins the Raam of this Shabad to Ramchandra of Ayodhya, and how the teaching supports his temple conclusion. Otherwise, he must correct the article. My reading must answer to the complete Shabad too; he can challenge it by showing where it is wrong.

He may praise the Ram Mandir in his own name. He has not established the right to present that praise in Bhagat Kabir Ji’s name.

Agreement is not correction. The correction belongs where the claim was published.

Verify

The quoted Gurmukhi, Panna references and quotation boundaries were checked at SriGranth and in Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Sri Guru Granth Sahib Darpan. On Panna 331, the complete Rahao, stanza 1 and closing stanza 3 are quoted. Stanza 2 was read but is not quoted. On Panna 1374, Saloks 190 and 191 are quoted in full. [2, 3]

The plain-English renderings follow Darpan. It explains udaas as “undecided”; the article therefore uses “uncertain”, not the “detached” in the translation Sidhu Ji uses. Darpan explains tirath as a religious place and kautakhaar as performers of religious plays. It identifies the Raam who was present in one body in Salok 191 as Dashrath’s son. These are Darpan’s explanations. No name or word has been added to the Gurmukhi. [2, 3]

The English renderings are mine, not quotations from Dr Sant Singh Khalsa Ji’s translation. Sidhu Ji’s words appear in quotation marks; their original spelling is retained.

Cross-check

The text was checked at SriGranth and in Darpan. SearchGurbani links are given for convenience. The Gurmukhi remains primary; the Roman reading lines and English senses are aids.

Correction note

PanthSeva will correct any error in Gurmukhi, Panna references, headings, attribution, Roman reading lines, English sense, quotations, dates or source descriptions publicly, calmly and with a dated note.

Source note

[1] Sidhu Ji’s public articles. The KBS Chronicle: “O Lord Ram, resolve this one paradox for me”: Bhagat Kabir, 23 January 2024; the Kabir Jayanti repost displayed as 28 June 2026; and the earlier Kabir Jayanti repost displayed as 11 June 2025. The June 2026 text is the main article examined. Its displayed date is not used to date the festival itself.

The related New Year piece is “1st January, 2024: Lord Ram in Bhagat Kabir’s Verses in Sri Guru Granth Sahib”. The page displays 31 December 2023; 1 January 2024 is part of its title. It discusses a different Shabad, on Panna 1158. It is cited here for Sidhu Ji’s stated approach to the meanings of Raam, not as the particular earlier article he necessarily meant in his reply.

[2] Shabad 42, Panna 331. SriGranth; Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Sri Guru Granth Sahib Darpan; and SearchGurbani, Shabad 1171. The complete sequence of questions informs the reading, including the question about Raam and the one who knows Raam.

[3] Saloks 190 and 191, Panna 1374. SriGranth; Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Sri Guru Granth Sahib Darpan; and SearchGurbani. Both complete Saloks are used, not the name Raam on its own.

[4] Correspondence. Section 4 is my summary of a private email exchange with Sidhu Ji, not a quotation of his email. His agreement that my point was valid is not treated as acceptance of every criticism or as a promise to revise.

[5] Publication setting. The Prime Minister’s Office account of the Ayodhya consecration records the ceremony on 22 January 2024. The date establishes the public setting, not a private motive.

The series title refers to Sidhu Ji’s public roles. This part examines his writing and reply, not his conduct in another role. The judgement remains answerable to Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

Checked to 8 September 2026.

S. Karan Bir Singh Sidhu Ji is invited to reply. If he marks his reply for publication, PanthSeva will publish it in full and unedited.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

In Japji Sahib, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji places everyone within Hukam, the Divine command and ordering within which all life exists:

ਹੁਕਮੈ ਅੰਦਰਿ ਸਭੁ ਕੋ ਬਾਹਰਿ ਹੁਕਮ ਨ ਕੋਇ ॥

Simple reading:
Hukmai andar sabh ko baahar hukam na ko-e.

Plain meaning: Everyone is within Hukam; no one is outside Hukam.

Reference: Japji Sahib, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Panna 1, extract from Pauri 2.

The person who has died and those who remain are within Hukam. The following line connects understanding Hukam with giving up speech governed by haumai, the self-centred sense of “I” and “mine”. Our words do not decide what happens. They can ask Waheguru for grace and for the strength to understand and accept His Will. Prayer leaves the decision with the One to whom we pray.

A prayer for the departed and the family

The Sikh Rehat Maryada allows its model Ardas to be adapted to the occasion, while preserving specified opening and concluding portions.[1]

An SGPC condolence statement of 27 February 2026 records a prayer for the departed and the family.[2] Its request can be expressed in English like this:

Waheguru, grant the departed soul a place at Your feet, and give the family strength to accept Your Will.

Both requests matter. The first entrusts the departed to Waheguru’s grace. The second asks for support for the family. Asking for a place at Waheguru’s feet leaves the outcome with Waheguru. It makes no claim that we know the departed person’s final spiritual state. This is prayer, not a verdict.

Article XIX of the Rehat Maryada directs Gurbani recitation or repetition of Waheguru beside the dying or deceased. It recommends the same remembrance to help the family accept God’s Will and provides for Ardas at several stages of the funeral.[3] These directions concern funeral observance; they do not prescribe every written condolence.

The article also rejects particular rites, including keeping a lamp to light the departed person’s path and piercing the skull in the belief that this secures the soul’s release.[3] Asking Waheguru for grace is different from claiming that a ceremony gives us control over another person’s destiny.

Gurbani also directs our understanding of peace. Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji calls us towards Naam, the Divine Name. In this Shabad, remembering Naam means turning the mind towards Waheguru in love, through the Guru’s teaching:

ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਹੁ ਮੇਰੇ ਗੁਰਸਿਖ ਮੀਤਾ ॥
ਨਾਮੁ ਜਪਹੁ ਨਾਮੇ ਸੁਖੁ ਪਾਵਹੁ ਨਾਮੁ ਰਖਹੁ ਗੁਰਮਤਿ ਮਨਿ ਚੀਤਾ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

Simple reading:
Naam japahu mere gursikh meetaa.
Naam japahu naame sukh paavahu naam rakhahu gurmat man cheetaa. ||1|| Rahao.

Plain meaning: My friends, Sikhs of the Guru, meditate on Naam. Meditate on Naam and find peace through Naam; through the Guru’s teaching, keep Naam in your mind.

Reference: Asa, Mahalla 4, Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji, Panna 367. Both lines of the Rahao, the pause for reflection.

The address is affectionate: the Guru speaks to Sikh friends. The Shabad describes a mind that hears Naam and learns love through the Guru’s teaching. This peace belongs to a relationship built while we live. Remembering Naam at a death brings us back to that continuing relationship.

Learning how to die

The Alahania are the Guru’s compositions in the form of funeral laments, turning attention towards remembrance of the Divine. In one of these Shabads, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji calls companions together in remembrance and reminds them that they too must depart. Within it comes this teaching:

ਮਰਣੁ ਨ ਮੰਦਾ ਲੋਕਾ ਆਖੀਐ ਜੇ ਕੋਈ ਮਰਿ ਜਾਣੈ ॥੨॥

Simple reading:
Maran na mandaa lokaa aakheeai je koi mar jaanai. ||2||

Plain meaning: O people, death is not to be called bad, if someone knows how to die.

Reference: Vadhans, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Panna 579. Closing line of stanza 2; the opening expresses the same teaching in different wording. The complete Shabad continues onto Panna 580.

The condition matters. The surrounding stanza speaks of serving the Divine Master and approaching with the offering of Naam. The teaching turns our attention towards the life through which we approach death. It asks us to learn something now, while there is still time to respond.

Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji develops this further. The following are the last three lines of a five-line Salok. Its opening considers how to die and turns towards keeping the Divine Master in remembrance:

ਮਰਣੈ ਤੇ ਜਗਤੁ ਡਰੈ ਜੀਵਿਆ ਲੋੜੈ ਸਭੁ ਕੋਇ ॥
ਗੁਰ ਪਰਸਾਦੀ ਜੀਵਤੁ ਮਰੈ ਹੁਕਮੈ ਬੂਝੈ ਸੋਇ ॥
ਨਾਨਕ ਐਸੀ ਮਰਨੀ ਜੋ ਮਰੈ ਤਾ ਸਦ ਜੀਵਣੁ ਹੋਇ ॥੨॥

Simple reading:
Maranai te jagat darai jeeviaa lorrai sabh ko-e.
Gur parsaadee jeevat marai hukmai boojhai so-e.
Naanak aisee marnee jo marai taa sad jeevan ho-e. ||2||

Plain meaning: The world fears death; everyone wishes to live. Through the Guru’s grace, one who dies while living understands Hukam. O Nanak, one who dies in this way has enduring life.

Reference: Bihagre ki Var, Salok Mahalla 3, Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji, Panna 555. Last three lines of the five-line Salok numbered 2 before Pauri 17.

Here, dying while living means becoming free from the hold of worldly attachment. The passage places this change within the Guru’s grace and understanding of Hukam. It gives the learner a way forward through fear. Calling ourselves Sikh does not mean that we have already learnt how to die.

Another Shabad of Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji makes the relationship with the Guru explicit:

ਸਬਦਿ ਮਰੈ ਤਿਸੁ ਸਦਾ ਅਨੰਦ ॥
ਸਤਿਗੁਰ ਭੇਟੇ ਗੁਰ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ॥
ਨਾ ਫਿਰਿ ਮਰੈ ਨ ਆਵੈ ਜਾਇ ॥
ਪੂਰੇ ਗੁਰ ਤੇ ਸਾਚਿ ਸਮਾਇ ॥੧॥

Simple reading:
Sabad marai tis sadaa anand.
Satgur bhete gur gobind.
Naa phir marai na aavai jaa-e.
Poore gur te saach samaa-e. ||1||

Plain meaning: One who dies through the Shabad has lasting joy and meets the True Guru, the Divine Guru. Such a person does not die again or come and go, and through the complete Guru merges in the True One.

Reference: Asa, Mahalla 3, Panchpade, Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji, Panna 364. Complete opening stanza. Panchpade identifies Shabads of five stanzas.

The dying here is understood as freedom from worldly attachment through the Shabad, the Guru’s Word. The stanza joins lasting joy and release from coming and going to union through the complete Guru. Its Rahao returns us to Naam and devotion received through the Guru. This is a teaching about a change in life through grace, not merely a description of the body’s death.

The words we choose

“RIP” abbreviates the Latin requiescat in pace, meaning “may he or she rest in peace”.[4] In Catholic usage, it is also a prayer for Divine mercy.[5] We should represent that usage accurately.

A wish for rest after death does not, by itself, express the fuller Sikh understanding developed here. The stanza on Panna 364 speaks of merging in the True One and freedom from coming and going through the complete Guru. In Ardas, we entrust the departed to Waheguru’s grace and ask for strength for the living. The prayer above names the One we ask; the letters “RIP” alone leave that unspoken.

The history of a phrase cannot tell us everything about the beliefs of someone who uses it. This is a question to consider in our own learning, rather than an invitation to correct grieving people at the moment of loss. Nor does it require a compulsory replacement slogan.

A Sikh may simply remember Waheguru, or express the prayer for the departed and the family in plain words. Alongside those words, we can sit with the bereaved, listen and offer practical help. Prayer gives us a way to ask for care; being there is a way to give it.

The Sikh does not need “Rest in Peace” to fill an absence in Sikh prayer. The words already exist, with an understanding that also tells us how to live. Our condolences will be read by people who are grieving. They should offer care.

What will we do with the life that remains?

Verify

Panna 1: Japji Sahib, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Pauri 2. Read the complete Pauri, including the closing connection between understanding Hukam and giving up speech governed by haumai. “Mahalla 1” in the article identifies the Guru; it is not presented as a separate printed heading above Japji Sahib. Open Panna 1 on SriGranth⁠ · Read Darpan⁠.

Panna 367: Asa, Mahalla 4, Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji. The Shabad ends ॥੪॥੮॥੬੦॥. Both Rahao lines are quoted. Open Panna 367 on SriGranth⁠ · Read Darpan⁠.

Pannas 579–580: Vadhans, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, second Shabad in the Alahania sequence, ending ॥੪॥੨॥. The quotation is stanza 2’s closing line. Its opening expresses the same teaching but is not word for word identical. Read all four stanzas. Open Panna 579⁠ · Open Panna 580⁠ · Read Darpan’s explanation of the complete Shabad⁠.

Panna 555: Bihagre ki Var, Salok Mahalla 3, Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji. Read the complete five-line Salok numbered 2 immediately before Pauri 17. The article quotes its last three lines. Open Panna 555 on SriGranth⁠ · Read Darpan⁠.

Panna 364: Asa, Mahalla 3, Panchpade, Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji. The Shabad ends ॥੫॥੧੧॥੫੦॥. The article quotes its complete opening stanza. Read the Rahao and remaining stanzas alongside it. Open Panna 364 on SriGranth⁠ · Read Darpan⁠.

Cross-check

Checked to 22 September 2026. The quoted Gurmukhi, locations, headings and numbering were checked against SriGranth. The complete relevant units and Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan were consulted for context. The Roman reading aids and English meanings were reviewed against the Gurmukhi. These Gurbani checks used digital text, not a printed-page facsimile comparison.

The links under Verify allow readers to open each Panna and its contextual commentary directly.

Correction note

PanthSeva will correct errors in quotation, attribution, reference, reading aid, English meaning or supporting evidence publicly and calmly, with a dated correction note.

Source note

The plain-English meanings draw on the Gurmukhi and Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan. They are interpretive aids; Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji remains the authority.

[1] Sikh Rehat Maryada, Article IV, 3(a). SGPC’s English publication, printed page 9, footnote 2: adaptation of the model Ardas and preservation of its specified opening and concluding portions. SGPC’s Section One HTML page⁠ · SGPC’s official English download⁠ · Scanned SGPC booklet consulted, PDF page 8⁠.

Article IV, 3(a), was checked in the linked scan of SGPC’s publication. The publisher’s Section One HTML page and official download are also linked for readers.

[2] SGPC, condolence statement on the passing of Bhai Harsimran Singh, 27 February 2026. See the final sentence of the Punjabi statement, which records the prayer before Karta Purakh for the departed and the family. The article’s English prayer renders that request; it is not presented as fixed wording for every Ardas. The original uses rooh, meaning soul. Read the SGPC statement⁠.

[3] Sikh Rehat Maryada, Article XIX(a), (b), (e) and (g). SGPC’s English publication, printed pages 29–31, covering funeral observance. SGPC’s official English download⁠ · Scanned booklet consulted, PDF pages 18–19⁠.

Article XIX was checked in the linked scan of SGPC’s publication. The official download is linked for readers.

[4] Merriam-Webster, “requiescat in pace”. Definition, abbreviation and tombstone usage. Read the dictionary entry⁠.

[5] United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, “Prayers for Death and Dying”. See “Prayers after Death”, particularly “Prayers Immediately after Death”, for the expression within prayers addressed to God. Read the prayers⁠.

Sources [4] and [5] establish the expression’s meaning and prayerful usage. They do not govern the meaning of Gurbani.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji’s two swords and Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji’s initiation of the Khalsa were substantial changes in Sikh life. Do those changes establish a break with the earlier Gurus’ teaching, or a separate source of Sikh authority? I examine that question through Gurbani and the historical accounts, beginning with the succession described in Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji. [1, 6, 8]

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

The Vaar describes the first succession in these words:

ਜੋਤਿ ਓਹਾ ਜੁਗਤਿ ਸਾਇ ਸਹਿ ਕਾਇਆ ਫੇਰਿ ਪਲਟੀਐ ॥

Simple reading: jot ohaa jugat saai seh kaaiaa fer palteeai.

Plain meaning: The Light was the same, the way was the same; the Master had only changed the body.

Ramkali Ki Vaar, Rai Balwand and Satta, pauri 2, Panna 966. One-line excerpt; the pauri continues onto Panna 967. [1]

Jot is the Guru’s Light; Jugat is the Guru’s way. The Vaar carries the account through Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji and Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji to Guru Arjan Sahib Ji upon the continuing throne. The later Sikh Rehat Maryada, the code of Sikh conduct, likewise asks Sikhs to understand all ten Gurus as one Light and one entity. The successors are received as Guru, not as followers offering revisions to an earlier teacher’s work. [1, 10]

By “already in the Granth”, I mean the teaching under which the Khalsa was called to live. Gurbani does not narrate the initiation of 1699 in advance or give an item-by-item history of the five Ks. Historical accounts are needed for those questions. Here I examine how the earlier teaching directs Sikhs to serve the One, live together and exercise responsibility towards others.

Guru Arjan Sahib Ji compiled the first Granth in 1604. Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji as received today also contains Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji’s later Bani. That Bani precedes 1699 but was not in the first compilation. The Panna references below locate passages in the received Granth; they do not date every passage to 1604. [2]

Within Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji, the Bani of the Bhagats, Bhatts, Rai Balwand and Satta is received as Gurbani under the same Guru. The attributions identify the contributors; they do not divide Gurbani into higher and lower authorities. [1, 15]

1. Authority before the two swords

The account of succession begins with Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s rule:

ਨਾਨਕਿ ਰਾਜੁ ਚਲਾਇਆ ਸਚੁ ਕੋਟੁ ਸਤਾਣੀ ਨੀਵ ਦੈ ॥

Simple reading: naanak raaj chalaaiaa sach kot sataanee neev dai.

Plain meaning: Nanak established a rule, with Truth as its fortress and a strong foundation beneath it.

Ramkali Ki Vaar, Rai Balwand and Satta, pauri 1, Panna 966. One-line excerpt. [1]

The surrounding lines describe a canopy placed over Bhai Lehna Ji, the teaching he receives, and Guru Nanak Sahib Ji bowing before him. This is the language of Guruship, founded on Truth. It does not establish a territorial kingdom. It describes the Guru governing the life of his Sikhs, not merely advising them as separate individuals. [1]

Bhatt Nal brings rule and spiritual union together in praise of Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji:

ਰਾਜੁ ਜੋਗੁ ਤਖਤੁ ਦੀਅਨੁ ਗੁਰ ਰਾਮਦਾਸ ॥

Simple reading: raaj jog takhat deean gur raamdaas.

Plain meaning: The One gave Guru Ram Das the throne of rule and spiritual union.

Swayye Mahle Chauthe Ke, Bhatt Nal, Swayya 4, Panna 1399. Opening line. [3]

Raj names rule; Jog names spiritual union. The following lines recall the earlier Gurus and the gift of spiritual understanding. No army is specified. The praise joins authority to union with the One. Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s response to conquest shows how the teaching addresses the exercise of worldly power. [3]

The Shabad addressed to Lalo begins by naming the source of Bani and confronting the invader:

ਜੈਸੀ ਮੈ ਆਵੈ ਖਸਮ ਕੀ ਬਾਣੀ ਤੈਸੜਾ ਕਰੀ ਗਿਆਨੁ ਵੇ ਲਾਲੋ ॥
ਪਾਪ ਕੀ ਜੰਞ ਲੈ ਕਾਬਲਹੁ ਧਾਇਆ ਜੋਰੀ ਮੰਗੈ ਦਾਨੁ ਵੇ ਲਾਲੋ ॥

Simple reading: jaisee mai aavai khasam kee baanee taisarraa karee giaan ve laalo.
paap kee janj lai kaabalahu dhaaiaa joree mangai daan ve laalo.

Plain meaning: As Bani comes to me from the Master, so I make it known, O Lalo. He has rushed from Kabul with a wedding party of sin and demands a gift by force, O Lalo.

Tilang, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Panna 722. Opening two consecutive lines; the Shabad continues onto Panna 723. [4]

Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Gurbani commentary, Darpan, identifies the invader as Babar and understands the demanded gift as the rule of Hind. The wedding image exposes conquest: the invading party seizes what it demands. As the Shabad continues, Muslim and Hindu women suffer its violence; their religion and caste offer no protection. Guru Nanak Sahib Ji names what is being done to them while continuing to praise the One and speak of Divine justice. Devotion includes this judgement of the conqueror. [4]

The officials who carry out a ruler’s will are also held to account. In Malar Ki Vaar on Panna 1288, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji describes rulers as lions and their officials as dogs tormenting people. The Salok distinguishes the wisdom of Naam from trained cunning and ends with the reckoning awaiting those who do harm. Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji’s pauri on Panna 1088 similarly distinguishes recognition of Truth from possession of land and power. Holding a throne does not establish the worth of its occupant. [4]

The teaching also bears on the Sikh who gains authority. Guru Arjan Sahib Ji’s passage on Halemi Raj, the rule of humility, occurs within prayer and praise. SriGranth’s displayed English describes people no longer oppressing one another; Darpan explains the absence of torment through freedom from vices within. I follow Darpan’s contextual reading below, then consider what it asks of a Sikh entrusted with public authority:

ਹੁਣਿ ਹੁਕਮੁ ਹੋਆ ਮਿਹਰਵਾਣ ਦਾ ॥
ਪੈ ਕੋਇ ਨ ਕਿਸੈ ਰਞਾਣਦਾ ॥
ਸਭ ਸੁਖਾਲੀ ਵੁਠੀਆ ਇਹੁ ਹੋਆ ਹਲੇਮੀ ਰਾਜੁ ਜੀਉ ॥੧੩॥

Simple reading: hun hukam hoaa miharvaan daa.
pai koi na kisai ranjaanadaa.
sabh sukhaalee vutheeaa ih hoaa halemee raaj jeeo.

Plain meaning: The Merciful One’s command now prevails: no vice torments anyone who has taken shelter in Him. All who receive His mercy dwell in inward peace; humility reigns within them.

Siri Raag, Mahalla 5, Guru Arjan Sahib Ji, stanza 13, Panna 74. Complete stanza; contextual sense following Darpan. The composition begins on Panna 73. [5]

Here humility belongs to a life sheltered by the Merciful One. A Sikh entrusted with authority must show that humility in the way other people are treated. Praising release from pride means little if an office is used to satisfy it. I apply the passage to public conduct on that basis, rather than treating it as a historical description of a state. [5]

2. What changed in 1606

In Vaar 1, pauri 38, Bhai Gurdas Ji describes Guru Nanak Sahib Ji returning to Kartarpur, putting aside the recluse’s dress and teaching as a householder. The pauri places recitation, discussion and shared devotion within that settled life. This is an early Sikh account, not an eyewitness report from Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s lifetime. [6]

The later histories published by the Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee record Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji’s teaching centres and the stepwell at Goindwal. Visitors were required to share langar, the common meal. The same histories describe Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji founding the town that became Amritsar and inviting merchants and craftspeople to settle there. Guru Arjan Sahib Ji continued the work of settlement and shared institutions, completed Sri Harmandir Sahib and compiled the Granth. [6]

These undertakings required land, resources and decisions about how people lived together. They cannot be accounted for as private devotion alone. Nor were they already the armed organisation developed under Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji. The difference between them is part of the history that needs explaining.

Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji succeeded to Guruship in 1606 after Guru Arjan Sahib Ji’s martyrdom. He wore the two swords associated with Piri, spiritual authority, and Miri, authority in worldly affairs. His armed following and the Akal Takht gave organised defence and public decision-making a new institutional form. Continuity of Guruship does not make these substantial developments less real. [6]

The Committee’s account says that Guru Sahib “converted the peaceful sect into a warlike community”. It is describing a military change. As an explanation of the whole religious development, however, the phrase leaves too much out. The Vaar’s account of rule, the judgement of conquest and the earlier organisation of community life all precede the two swords. An account of 1606 needs to explain what changed without erasing that evidence. [1, 4, 6]

Committee account of Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji

Bhai Gurdas Ji’s Vaar 26, pauri 24, gives earlier evidence of questions about the changed practices. It sets the earlier Gurus’ settled instruction beside movement from place to place, imprisonment in a fort and hunting. The pauri closes by affirming that truth cannot be concealed and that Sikhs remain drawn to the Guru. It neither names nor dates the two swords. Its value here is different: an early Sikh writer presents questions about outward change while affirming the Guru. [6]

This matters beyond the description of the past. If military organisation is taken to establish a separate source of Sikh authority, political success can become its own justification. Under continuing Guruship, those who organise defence remain answerable to the teaching that had already condemned the abuse of power. A Sikh community cannot seek protection from cruelty and then permit cruelty in its own exercise of strength.

3. The teaching received in 1699

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s invitation to the path of love describes the commitment through which I understand the Khalsa’s initiation:

ਜਉ ਤਉ ਪ੍ਰੇਮ ਖੇਲਣ ਕਾ ਚਾਉ ॥
ਸਿਰੁ ਧਰਿ ਤਲੀ ਗਲੀ ਮੇਰੀ ਆਉ ॥
ਇਤੁ ਮਾਰਗਿ ਪੈਰੁ ਧਰੀਜੈ ॥
ਸਿਰੁ ਦੀਜੈ ਕਾਣਿ ਨ ਕੀਜੈ ॥੨੦॥

Simple reading: jau tau prem khelan kaa chaau.
sir dhar talee galee meree aau.
it maarag pair dhareejai.
sir deejai kaan na keejai.

Plain meaning: If you long to play the game of love, place your head on your palm and come into my lane. When you set foot on this path, give your head without hesitation.

Salok Vaaran Te Vadheek, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Salok 20, Panna 1412. Complete Salok. [7]

The opening speaks to someone who longs for love of the One. Giving the head belongs within that longing. Darpan explains the image through giving up haumai, pride and self-centredness, and concern for public approval. I cannot offer myself to the Guru while reserving the decisions in which my own importance matters most to me. [7]

Guru Arjan Sahib Ji’s Salok on Panna 1102 joins accepting death with becoming the dust of everyone’s feet. Darpan reads this as the death of haumai and the humility through which the seeker approaches the Divine. Willingness to offer the self cannot become a claim to stand above other people. [7]

The received Sikh account of Vaisakhi 1699 tells how Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji called for a head and five Sikhs answered. They received Amrit in the Khalsa initiation and became the Panj Pyare, the Five Beloved Ones. Guru Sahib then received initiation from them. The detailed narrative used here comes through a later historical account, not from Gurbani. I understand their response through the wholehearted commitment described in the Salok; the passage does not record or predict the ceremony. [7, 8]

The Committee’s account identifies Bhai Daya Singh Ji with a Sobti Khatri background in Lahore, and Bhai Dharam Singh Ji with a Jat background in Hastinapur. It describes Bhai Mohkam Singh Ji as a washerman from Dwarka, Bhai Himmat Singh Ji as a water-carrier from Jagannathpur, and Bhai Sahib Singh Ji as a barber from Bidar. These were people separated by place and inherited social position, receiving the same initiation. [8]

Guru Sahib’s reception of initiation from the Five deserves attention. Those who had offered themselves were entrusted to administer Amrit to him. This can be read beside the Vaar’s account of Guru Nanak Sahib Ji bowing before Bhai Lehna Ji. Conferring Guruship and receiving initiation are different acts. The point of comparison is the Guru’s way taking precedence over personal rank, not the creation of another line of personal Gurus in the Five. [1, 8]

The Khalsa gave a shared discipline to people undertaking to live the Guru’s teaching. That common life also confronted inherited caste. Guru Nanak Sahib Ji gives the governing measure in the Rahao, the central refrain, of an Aasa Shabad:

ਜਾਣਹੁ ਜੋਤਿ ਨ ਪੂਛਹੁ ਜਾਤੀ ਆਗੈ ਜਾਤਿ ਨ ਹੇ ॥੧॥ ਰਹਾਉ ॥

Simple reading: jaanahu jot na poochhahu jaatee aagai jaat na he. Rahao.

Plain meaning: Recognise the Divine Light; do not ask about caste. In the world beyond, caste has no standing.

Aasa, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Panna 349. Complete Rahao, read with the Shabad. [9]

The surrounding Shabad speaks of the One who creates, gives and hears the plea of a person of any caste. The Five’s different backgrounds belong within a teaching that had already refused caste as the measure of a person. Article XXIV(n) of the Maryada requires all the initiates to share the remaining Amrit; the Network of Sikh Organisations’ guide explicitly describes drinking from the same bowl. Caste contempt afterwards contradicts the teaching and the equality accepted together. [8, 9, 10]

Equality also concerns women. Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s Salok on Panna 473 confronts contempt for woman by recalling the relationships through which human life is sustained. The Maryada admits men and women of any country, religion or caste who embrace Sikhi and accept its requirements. Its naming provisions require Singh for boys and Kaur for girls. That shared Sikh identity is named for girls as well as boys from childhood, not only for the men who first received initiation. These are continuing provisions; they do not date every practice to 1699. [9, 10]

4. Courage and the duty to protect

Bhagat Kabir Ji’s two Saloks on Panna 1105 speak through the imagery of battle:

ਗਗਨ ਦਮਾਮਾ ਬਾਜਿਓ ਪਰਿਓ ਨੀਸਾਨੈ ਘਾਉ ॥
ਖੇਤੁ ਜੁ ਮਾਂਡਿਓ ਸੂਰਮਾ ਅਬ ਜੂਝਨ ਕੋ ਦਾਉ ॥੧॥
ਸੂਰਾ ਸੋ ਪਹਿਚਾਨੀਐ ਜੁ ਲਰੈ ਦੀਨ ਕੇ ਹੇਤ ॥
ਪੁਰਜਾ ਪੁਰਜਾ ਕਟਿ ਮਰੈ ਕਬਹੂ ਨ ਛਾਡੈ ਖੇਤੁ ॥੨॥੨॥

Simple reading: gagan damaamaa baajio pario neesaanai ghaau.
khet ju maandio soormaa ab joojhan ko daau.
sooraa so pahichaaneeai ju larai deen ke het.
purjaa purjaa kat marai kabahoo na chhaadai khet.

Plain meaning: The battle drum sounds in the sky; the target has been struck. The warrior has taken the field; now is the time to struggle. Recognise as a warrior the one who fights for the poor. Though cut to pieces and killed, that person never abandons the field.

Maru, Salok Kabir, Bhagat Kabir Ji, Panna 1105. Both Saloks in full, read with the preceding Shabad. [11]

Darpan reads the first Salok through the person standing against vices in the world’s field of struggle. In the second, it understands deen through the poor; SriGranth’s displayed English gives religion. I follow Darpan’s contextual reading here. It relates the Saloks to the preceding Shabad, where poor Bidar’s loving devotion matters more than royal hospitality. [11]

Standing beside a poor person whom a ruler disregards may mean losing that ruler’s favour. Darpan joins that courage to freedom from the vices which make a person dependent on wealth and status. Inner struggle and responsibility towards the poor belong together in this reading. It does not confine courage to private feeling or make every battle image an instruction to fight physically. [11]

Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji’s Salok holds freedom from fear together with the refusal to intimidate:

ਭੈ ਕਾਹੂ ਕਉ ਦੇਤ ਨਹਿ ਨਹਿ ਭੈ ਮਾਨਤ ਆਨ ॥
ਕਹੁ ਨਾਨਕ ਸੁਨਿ ਰੇ ਮਨਾ ਗਿਆਨੀ ਤਾਹਿ ਬਖਾਨਿ ॥੧੬॥

Simple reading: bhai kaahoo kau det nah nah bhai maanat aan.
kahu naanak sun re manaa giaanee taahi bakhaan.

Plain meaning: The person who frightens no one and fears no other: Nanak says, listen, mind, call that person spiritually wise.

Salok Mahalla 9, Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji, Salok 16, Panna 1427. Complete Salok. [11]

This is teaching before 1699, although not part of the 1604 compilation. Applied to the bearer of a kirpan, the sword carried as part of Khalsa discipline, it requires courage without bullying or revenge. Restraint must not become an excuse for leaving someone defenceless. Protection may demand shared effort and a willingness to bear a cost; neither personal pride nor the wish for an easier life can decide whether another person deserves help. [2, 11]

5. What the name and the discipline mean

The word khaalse appears in Bhagat Kabir Ji’s Bani:

ਕਹੁ ਕਬੀਰ ਜਨ ਭਏ ਖਾਲਸੇ ਪ੍ਰੇਮ ਭਗਤਿ ਜਿਹ ਜਾਨੀ ॥੪॥੩॥

Simple reading: kahu kabeer jan bhae khaalse prem bhagat jih jaanee.

Plain meaning: Kabir says: those servants who have understood loving devotion have become free.

Sorath, Bani Bhagat Kabir Ji, Panna 655. Final line of stanza 4 and of the Shabad beginning on Panna 654; read with its Rahao. [12]

The Shabad begins on Panna 654 with religious effort that has not brought the seeker beyond fear of death. Its closing line speaks of freedom through loving devotion. Darpan explains khaalse in that context as free. The earlier occurrence of the word is therefore not, by itself, evidence that the Shabad describes the later initiation. Its teaching addresses the life of the person who now bears the name. [12]

The Committee’s historical account describes the Khalsa as Sikhs belonging directly to Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji, without the masands, local representatives, standing between them. That account helps explain an institutional relationship. It does not replace the meaning of Bhagat Kabir Ji’s Shabad. A shared word is not proof that the two sources describe the same event. [8, 12]

The religious commitment within which the Khalsa belongs is also expressed before 1699. Guru Arjan Sahib Ji states:

ਨਾ ਹਮ ਹਿੰਦੂ ਨ ਮੁਸਲਮਾਨ ॥
ਅਲਹ ਰਾਮ ਕੇ ਪਿੰਡੁ ਪਰਾਨ ॥੪॥

Simple reading: naa ham hindu na musalmaan.
alah raam ke pind paraan.

Plain meaning: We are neither Hindu nor Muslim. Our body and life-breath belong to the One called Allah and Raam.

Bhairau, Mahalla 5, Guru Arjan Sahib Ji, stanza 4, Panna 1136. Complete stanza, read with the Shabad and its Rahao. [13]

The Rahao names the One alone as Master. The surrounding stanzas distinguish this worship from the religious observances being discussed. Body and life-breath belong to the One: that is the positive commitment accompanying the refusal of the two labels. Sikhs did not have to wait until 1699 to receive this teaching, and the Khalsa serves the One under the same Guru. [13]

That does not remove the need to explain particular requirements accurately. Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s challenge to the janeu, the sacred thread, on Panna 471 calls for compassion, contentment, self-restraint and truth. It does not declare every visible discipline worthless. The Maru passage containing saabat soorat on Pannas 1083–1084 addresses the seeker through Muslim religious vocabulary; it is not a list of Khalsa requirements. And the prayer offering hair in humble service on Panna 500 does not establish the historical origin of keeping kesh. [14]

The Maryada states the continuing requirement of the five Ks: kesh, uncut hair; kangha, the comb; kara, the steel bracelet; kachhera, the prescribed undergarment; and kirpan, the sword. [10]

The passages examined here do not prescribe the kirpan, kara, kangha or kachhera as Khalsa initiation requirements. I cite the Maryada for that continuing prescription. Correcting a strained Gurbani explanation does not make the Guru-given discipline optional. Nor can keeping the articles excuse conduct that contradicts the teaching received with them. [10, 14]

6. The Guru who teaches the Khalsa now

Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji had already stated the Sikh’s relationship with Bani before either the two swords or the initiation of 1699:

ਬਾਣੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੁਰੂ ਹੈ ਬਾਣੀ ਵਿਚਿ ਬਾਣੀ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤੁ ਸਾਰੇ ॥
ਗੁਰੁ ਬਾਣੀ ਕਹੈ ਸੇਵਕੁ ਜਨੁ ਮਾਨੈ ਪਰਤਖਿ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਿਸਤਾਰੇ ॥੫॥

Simple reading: baanee guroo guroo hai baanee vich baanee amrit saare.
gur baanee kahai sevak jan maanai partakh guroo nistaare.

Plain meaning: Bani is Guru, and Guru is present in Bani. In Bani is the life-giving Amrit that the Sikh holds within. The Guru speaks Bani, the servant accepts it, and the Guru surely carries the servant across.

Nat, Mahalla 4, Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji, stanza 5, Panna 982. Complete stanza, excerpted from the Shabad and read with its Rahao. [15]

Darpan explains Amrit here through the life-giving Naam, the Divine Name, within Bani. The servant receives with faith, and the Guru carries across. The surrounding Shabad describes the devotee longing for the One, the One watching over the devotee’s breaths, and grace strengthening devotion. This care belongs to the life the Khalsa receives. The Sikh is not left to meet its demands by willpower alone. [15]

In Sidh Gosht, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji names Shabad as Guru and describes his attention, joined to Shabad, as the disciple. This relationship precedes the historical succession at Nanded. The Committee’s accounts record Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji including Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji’s Bani in the Granth and giving Guruship to Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji in 1708. The Guru who formed the Khalsa left it before a present Guru, not only with the memory of departed teachers. [2, 15]

The Maryada prescribes Bani recitation during the preparation of Amrit. Initiation is therefore received with the Guru’s Word, and the later life of the Sikh remains one of listening, devotion and learning. The ceremony does not provide a rival authority that can release its recipient from Bani. [10, 15]

Conclusion

The two swords and the common initiation were substantial developments in Sikh life. Their history needs to be studied, but their new forms do not establish a different Guruship. Gurbani had already addressed rule and public harm, while the earlier Gurus had organised a shared life. The teaching gives the devotion, equality and courage through which that life must be lived. The Khalsa’s common discipline belongs within this teaching.

That is why continuity matters to Sikh institutions as well as to individual devotion. A community acting in the Guru’s name cannot treat political success as sufficient justification for its actions, or leave the vulnerable unprotected while praising courage. It needs the prayer and daily engagement with Bani through which Sikhs continue to learn together. Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji remains the Guru before whom that common life is answerable.

Verify

The twelve Gurbani quotation blocks are identified beside the text and in the source notes. Read each complete unit, including continuations across Pannas and its Rahao where present. The included Bani of the Bhagats, Bhatts, Rai Balwand and Satta is received as Gurbani, not as lesser supporting evidence. Bhai Gurdas Ji’s Vaars, historical accounts and the Maryada are cited separately and are not presented as Gurbani. Gurmukhi remains primary; my Roman readings and plain-English meanings are learning aids. The connections I draw between the sources and present responsibilities are the study’s arguments, not additional words in the quotations.

Cross-check

Checked to 14 September 2026. The twelve Gurmukhi quotation blocks and their locations were compared with SriGranth, and the relevant Darpan readings were revisited. This revision also checked the Panna 1102 Salok and the Mahalla 9 heading, consulted Vaar 1, pauri 38, and Vaar 26, pauri 24, directly in the iGurbani digital reproduction, and mapped the Maryada clauses to the claims they support. The Five’s backgrounds and the two-swords account were checked against the cited Committee summaries. These checks do not constitute a manuscript collation or a comparison with a printed edition of the Vaars.

Correction note

PanthSeva will correct errors in Gurmukhi, Roman reading, plain meaning, attribution, Panna reference, date or factual claim publicly, calmly and with a dated note.

Source note

[1] The Vaar and continuing Guruship. Ramkali Ki Vaar, Rai Balwand and Satta, Pannas 966–968. Pauri 1 supplies the account of rule and bowing before Bhai Lehna Ji; pauri 2, continuing onto Panna 967, supplies Jot and Jugat. Pauris 6–8 continue through the later Gurus. Royal language is not treated as proof of territorial government. Maryada Article XVI(c) separately records the unity of the ten Gurus.

SriGranth, Panna 966 · Panna 967 · Panna 968 · Darpan, Panna 966 · Panna 967 · Panna 968 · Article XVI

[2] Compilation and succession. The Committee’s accounts of Guru Arjan Sahib Ji, Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji and Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji supply the received history of 1604, the addition of Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji’s Bani and succession at Nanded in 1708. These later summaries are not eyewitness records examined here. Panna 1427 is used as teaching before 1699, not as part of the 1604 compilation.

Guru Arjan Sahib Ji · Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji · Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji

[3] Raj Jog. Bhatt Nal, Swayya 4, Swayye Mahle Chauthe Ke, Panna 1399. Darpan identifies the giver in the opening line as the One. The passage praises Guruship and recalls the earlier Gurus; it does not specify a later military organisation.

SriGranth, Panna 1399 · Darpan, Panna 1399

[4] Conquest and rulers. Tilang, Mahalla 1, Pannas 722–723. The English meaning of the two opening lines retains the unnamed agent, Kabul, the wedding party and the gift demanded by force. Darpan’s identification of Babar and the rule of Hind is explained separately in the body. The paraphrases concern Malar Ki Vaar, Salok Mahalla 1, Salok 2 before pauri 22, Panna 1288, and Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji’s pauri 6 on Panna 1088.

SriGranth, Panna 722 · Panna 723 · Panna 1288 · Panna 1088 · Darpan, Panna 722

[5] Halemi Raj. Siri Raag, Mahalla 5, stanza 13, Panna 74, in the composition beginning on Panna 73. SriGranth’s displayed English describes the ending of oppression between people. Darpan reads the freedom from torment through vices and the rule through humility within. The English meaning follows that contextual reading; its application to public conduct is my argument.

SriGranth, Panna 73 · Panna 74 · Darpan, Panna 73 · Panna 74

[6] Community life and military change. Bhai Gurdas Ji, Vaar 1, pauri 38, and Vaar 26, pauri 24, consulted directly in the iGurbani digital reproduction. The first describes Kartarpur’s settled life; the second presents questions about changed practices and closes by affirming the Guru. It does not specify the two swords or their date. The Committee’s later accounts of Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji, Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji, Guru Arjan Sahib Ji and Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji supply the institutional examples, succession in 1606 and the two-swords narrative. The exact peaceful-to-warlike phrase is from the last account, linked beside the quotation. No precise Akal Takht foundation date is claimed.

Vaar 1, pauri 38 · Vaar 26, pauri 24 · Guru Amar Das Sahib Ji · Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji · Guru Arjan Sahib Ji · Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji

[7] Love, the offered head and humility. Salok Vaaran Te Vadheek, Mahalla 1, Salok 20, Panna 1412. Darpan explains the offered head through giving up haumai and the final instruction through giving up hesitation and concern for public approval. The additional paraphrase is Guru Arjan Sahib Ji’s Salok 1 in the group before pauri 23 of Maru Ki Vaar, Panna 1102. Darpan reads its death-language through the death of haumai and becoming the dust of all. Neither passage narrates the 1699 ceremony.

SriGranth, Panna 1412 · Darpan, Panna 1412 · SriGranth, Panna 1102 · Darpan, Panna 1102

[8] Vaisakhi and the Five. The Committee’s account of Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji cites Koer Singh’s Gurbilas Patshahi 10 for the call for a head. It supplies the Five’s places and social or occupational backgrounds, initiation, Guru Sahib’s reception of initiation and the relationship after rejection of the masands. Their names are given here in post-initiation form. The descriptions follow this account; caste labels are not converted into supposed trades. The underlying chronicle has not been independently collated.

Historical account

[9] Caste and women. Aasa, Mahalla 1, complete Rahao, Panna 349. The Salok on woman in Aasa Ki Vaar, Panna 473, is paraphrased in its account of human relationships, not treated as a modern legal provision. The application to equality in initiation is the essay’s argument.

SriGranth, Panna 349 · Panna 473 · Darpan, Panna 349 · Panna 473

[10] Continuing discipline. SGPC English Sikh Rehat Maryada, as reproduced at Sikhs.org: Article XVI(c), unity of the ten Gurus; Article XVII(a), Singh and Kaur in naming; Article XXIV(d), admission and the five Ks before initiation; (f), explanation and willing acceptance; (i)–(k), preparation with recitation, with the Banis listed in (j); (h) and (n), the vessel and sharing the remaining Amrit; and (p), continuing discipline and the five Ks. The Network of Sikh Organisations’ guide explicitly says that the remaining Amrit is shared from the same bowl. Article XXIV(t) concerns karah prashad, not this remaining Amrit. The later code does not date every practice to 1699.

Articles XVI and XVII · Article XXIV · NSO guide

[11] Courage and restraint. Both Kabir Saloks on Panna 1105 are quoted in full. Darpan reads the first inwardly and deen in the second through the poor, relating the Saloks to the preceding Bidar Shabad; SriGranth’s displayed English gives religion. The choice is stated in the body. Salok Mahalla 9, Salok 16, Panna 1427, gives the refusal to intimidate or be ruled by fear. Its heading begins on Panna 1426: Mahalla 9 identifies Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji, while Nanak is the shared signature of the Gurus’ Bani. Neither passage prescribes the kirpan; the application concerns its bearer.

SriGranth, Panna 1105 · Panna 1426 · Panna 1427 · Darpan, Panna 1105 · Panna 1427

[12] Khaalse. The quoted line ends the Sorath Shabad beginning on Panna 654 and concluding on Panna 655. Darpan’s explanation appears under Panna 654. Freedom through loving devotion is distinguished from the later institutional use of the name.

SriGranth, Panna 654 · Panna 655 · Darpan, Panna 654

[13] Religious belonging. Bhairau, Mahalla 5, stanza 4, Panna 1136, read with the Rahao and surrounding stanzas. Attribution follows the Mahalla 5 heading. The passage supplies earlier religious commitment, not a prediction of initiation.

SriGranth, Panna 1136 · Darpan, Panna 1136

[14] Particular disciplines. The janeu passage on Panna 471 is read with its connected Saloks. The Maru Shabad on Pannas 1083–1084 addresses the seeker through Muslim religious vocabulary; Darpan explains saabat soorat with reference to circumcision and moustache trimming. The Gujri prayer on Panna 500 offers hair in service. These passages are not prescriptions of the five Ks as Khalsa initiation requirements. This is a limit on the use of these passages, not a claim that no related word or object occurs anywhere in the Granth.

SriGranth, Panna 471 · Panna 1083 · Panna 1084 · Panna 500 · Darpan, Panna 1084 · Panna 500

[15] Bani and present Guruship. Nat, Mahalla 4, stanza 5, Panna 982, read with the complete Shabad and Rahao. Darpan explains Amrit through Naam, saare through holding within, and reception through faith. Its full explanation uses the “certainly” sense of partakh. Stanza 7 describes Divine care and grace. Sidh Gosht, Ramkali, Mahalla 1, pauri 44, Panna 943, is paraphrased. The Sikh’s response is not made the cause of Guruship. The stanza does not establish the historical reason for naming the initiation Amrit.

SriGranth, Panna 982 · Panna 943 · Darpan, Panna 982 · Panna 943

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

The Roman line is only a reading aid, not the translation. The English sentence gives the plain meaning.

Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji describes the succession from Guru Nanak Sahib Ji to Guru Angad Sahib Ji in these words:

ਜੋਤਿ ਓਹਾ ਜੁਗਤਿ ਸਾਇ ਸਹਿ ਕਾਇਆ ਫੇਰਿ ਪਲਟੀਐ ॥

Simple reading: jot ohaa jugat saai seh kaaiaa fer palteeai.

Plain meaning: The Light was the same, the way was the same; the Master had only changed the body.

Ramkali Ki Vaar, Rai Balwand and Satta, pauri 2, Panna 966. One-line excerpt; the pauri continues onto Panna 967. [1]

Jot is the Guru’s Light; Jugat is the Guru’s way. The verse describes the same Guruship continuing in Guru Angad Sahib Ji. The Sikh Rehat Maryada, the code of Sikh conduct, likewise asks Sikhs to understand all ten Gurus as one Light and one entity. Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji’s authority is therefore not that of a follower offering a later opinion on Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s teaching. He is Guru. [1]

Their actions and circumstances differed. Continuity does not require every act of the later Gurus to have been performed by the first Guru, and this verse does not name the five Ks. The history of the five Ks needs historical evidence. But a new form of discipline does not in itself establish a break in Guruship. A Sikh receives the Khalsa’s discipline under the same authority as the teaching through which its meaning is understood.

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s Salok on Panna 1412 describes the commitment through which the seeker enters the path of love:

ਜਉ ਤਉ ਪ੍ਰੇਮ ਖੇਲਣ ਕਾ ਚਾਉ ॥
ਸਿਰੁ ਧਰਿ ਤਲੀ ਗਲੀ ਮੇਰੀ ਆਉ ॥
ਇਤੁ ਮਾਰਗਿ ਪੈਰੁ ਧਰੀਜੈ ॥
ਸਿਰੁ ਦੀਜੈ ਕਾਣਿ ਨ ਕੀਜੈ ॥੨੦॥

Simple reading: jau tau prem khelan kaa chaau.
sir dhar talee galee meree aau.
it maarag pair dhareejai.
sir deejai kaan na keejai.

Plain meaning: If you long to play the game of love, place your head on your palm and come into my lane. When you set foot on this path, give your head without hesitation.

Salok Vaaran Te Vadheek, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Salok 20, Panna 1412. Complete Salok. [2]

The invitation begins with a longing for love of the One. The offered head belongs within that longing. Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Gurbani commentary, Darpan, explains the image through giving up haumai, pride and self-centredness, and concern for public approval. I cannot offer myself to the Guru while keeping the right to ignore the teaching whenever it becomes difficult. Love reaches the decisions I would rather keep for myself. [2]

The received Sikh account of Vaisakhi in 1699 tells how Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji called for a head and five Sikhs answered. They came from different regions and caste backgrounds and became the Panj Pyare, the Five Beloved Ones. After administering Amrit to them, Guru Sahib received initiation from them himself. Those who had offered themselves were entrusted with administering the same initiation to the Guru. [3]

I understand their response as a historical expression of the wholehearted commitment described in the Salok, not as an event the passage records or predicts. The Khalsa gave that commitment a common, disciplined form. Those receiving initiation were joined in a life of devotion and service, with responsibilities they would learn to carry together.

The life received in initiation

That life is sustained by the Guru’s Word. Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji explains the Sikh’s relationship with Bani in a Shabad about Divine protection and devotion:

ਬਾਣੀ ਗੁਰੂ ਗੁਰੂ ਹੈ ਬਾਣੀ ਵਿਚਿ ਬਾਣੀ ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤੁ ਸਾਰੇ ॥
ਗੁਰੁ ਬਾਣੀ ਕਹੈ ਸੇਵਕੁ ਜਨੁ ਮਾਨੈ ਪਰਤਖਿ ਗੁਰੂ ਨਿਸਤਾਰੇ ॥੫॥

Simple reading: baanee guroo guroo hai baanee vich baanee amrit saare.
gur baanee kahai sevak jan maanai partakh guroo nistaare.

Plain meaning: Bani is Guru, and Guru is present in Bani. In Bani is the life-giving Amrit that the Sikh holds within. The Guru speaks Bani, the servant accepts it, and the Guru surely carries the servant across.

Nat, Mahalla 4, Guru Ram Das Sahib Ji, stanza 5, Panna 982. Complete stanza, excerpted from the Shabad and read with its Rahao. [4]

Amrit here speaks of the life-giving Naam, the Divine Name, within Bani. The Sikh receives Bani with faith, and the Guru carries the Sikh across. Later in the Shabad, the devotee longs for the One while the One watches over the devotee’s breaths. Grace strengthens the devotion. The Sikh who accepts this demanding discipline also turns to the Guru for help in living it. [4]

The Maryada brings Bani and the visible discipline together in the initiation itself. Those seeking Amrit must keep the five Ks: kesh, uncut hair; kangha, the comb; kara, the steel bracelet; kachhera, the prescribed undergarment; and kirpan, the sword. The teaching and obligations are explained before Amrit is prepared, and those seeking initiation are asked whether they accept them willingly. Japji Sahib and specified stanzas of Anand Sahib are among the Banis recited during the preparation. [5]

The remaining Amrit is shared by those receiving initiation, all drinking from the same bowl. Men and women of any country, religion or caste may receive it when they embrace Sikhi and accept its requirements. [5] Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s teaching on Panna 349 directs us to recognise the Divine Light rather than ask about caste. [6] Suppose a Sikh shares that bowl with someone, then refuses to eat with them because of their caste. The refusal contradicts both the teaching and the equality accepted in initiation. The Sikh must welcome the other initiate to sit and eat beside them afterwards.

Keeping the five Ks does not excuse dishonesty. The Sikh must put the wrongdoing right; the failure is no reason to discard the discipline. Equally, an appeal to good conduct does not make the Guru-given discipline optional. Its authority does not depend on claiming that every wearer behaves better than every non-wearer. A Sikh receives it from the Guru, with the responsibility to learn what keeping it requires.

What others should be able to expect

The kirpan makes the responsibility to protect especially clear. Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji, who succeeded to Guruship in 1606, wore the two swords associated with Piri, spiritual authority, and Miri, authority in worldly affairs. The Khalsa’s readiness to protect belongs within that continuing responsibility. [7] It requires people who can act together, share resources and remain beside someone who cannot protect themselves. The Maryada also places organised collective service alongside individual duties. Devotion does not relieve the community of those shared obligations. [5]

Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji’s Salok 16 on Panna 1427 identifies the spiritually wise person as one who neither frightens others nor lives in fear of them. The Salok gives us a measure for the bearer of a kirpan. Strength cannot excuse bullying or revenge, while restraint cannot become an excuse for leaving another person defenceless. What protects the person in danger must matter more than our wish to appear brave, or to avoid inconvenience. [7]

After the killings at the Oak Creek gurdwara in Wisconsin in 2012, KQED’s Mina Kim asked Mandeep Singh Dhillon whether people were worried about attending Sikh prayer services. He described Sikh identity as “distinctive by design” and connected that visibility with protecting the defenceless. Asked about his own community’s safety, he spoke of its responsibility towards others. [8]

A person who recognises a Sikh should have reason to expect help. That expectation cannot be sustained by explaining our appearance while leaving the responsibility to someone else. It asks something of the person who can be recognised, and of the community that teaches and supports them. The interview gives a contemporary expression to this responsibility.

The received Sikh account records Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji including Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji’s Bani in the Granth. At Nanded in 1708, Guru Sahib gave Guruship to Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji. The Guru who formed the Khalsa did not leave it with only the memory of departed teachers. [3] Nor does the need for historical evidence about its discipline make Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji an incomplete Guru.

The Khalsa continues before a present Guru, with Bani governing and sustaining the life received in initiation. Its visible identity makes a shared commitment recognisable: devotion to the One, equal regard for others, and courage in their protection. Through daily engagement with Bani and prayer, Sikhs learn to keep that commitment with one another’s help. The authority under which they act remains Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

Related work

To follow: The Khalsa Was Already in the Granth, a companion study of the Granth’s account of the Guru’s authority before 1606 and of the teaching the Khalsa was called to live in 1699.

Verify

Read Ramkali Ki Vaar, pauri 2, on Pannas 966–967; Salok Vaaran Te Vadheek, Mahalla 1, Salok 20, on Panna 1412; and the complete Nat, Mahalla 4, Shabad on Panna 982 from which stanza 5 is quoted above, including its Rahao. The passages on Pannas 349 and 1427 are paraphrased. Gurmukhi remains primary; the Roman readings and plain-English meanings are learning aids.

Cross-check

Checked to 14 September 2026 against SriGranth and the relevant entries in Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Darpan. The checks covered the three quotations and their contexts, including pauri 2’s continuation and the Nat Shabad’s Rahao. The two paraphrased passages were checked at SriGranth. The cited Committee histories, KQED interview and Maryada provisions were revisited; the common-bowl wording was compared with the NSO guide.

Correction note

PanthSeva will correct errors in Gurmukhi, Roman reading, plain meaning, attribution, Panna reference and factual claims publicly, calmly and with a dated note.

Source note

[1] Continuing Guruship. Ramkali Ki Vaar, Rai Balwand and Satta, pauri 2, Pannas 966–967. The line concerns the first succession. Darpan assists the reading of Jot and Jugat. Maryada Article XVI(c) separately records the unity of the ten Gurus; it does not govern the verse’s meaning.

SriGranth, Panna 966 · SriGranth, Panna 967 · Darpan, Panna 966 · Darpan, Panna 967 · Article XVI

[2] Love and the offered head. Salok Vaaran Te Vadheek, Mahalla 1, complete Salok 20, Panna 1412. Darpan explains the offered head through giving up haumai and concern for public approval, and kaan through hesitation. The connection with 1699 is the essay’s interpretation.

SriGranth, Panna 1412 · Darpan, Panna 1412

[3] Vaisakhi, the Granth and Nanded. The Shiromani Gurdwara Parbandhak Committee’s account of Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji supplies the received accounts of the Five, initiation in 1699, Guru Sahib receiving initiation and succession at Nanded in 1708. Its account of Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji records the inclusion of his Bani by Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji. These are later historical summaries, not eyewitness records examined here.

Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji: historical account · Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji: historical account

[4] Bani as Guru. Nat, Mahalla 4, stanza 5, Panna 982, read with the complete Shabad and its Rahao. The English follows Darpan’s explanation of Naam held within, faith and the Guru carrying the Sikh across. Stanza 7 describes longing, Divine care and grace. The passage does not establish why the initiation was named Amrit.

SriGranth, Panna 982 · Darpan, Panna 982

[5] Initiation and shared service. Sikh Rehat Maryada, Article XXIV(d), (f), (j), (n) and (p), in the SGPC English version reproduced at Sikhs.org; the opening paragraph of Article XXIII, headed “Panth’s Status of Guruhood”, supplies the reference to organised collective service. The NSO guide explicitly describes drinking from the same bowl. These continuing requirements do not establish that every procedural detail began in 1699.

Articles XXIII–XXIV · NSO guide

[6] Caste. Aasa, Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji, Panna 349. The Rahao is paraphrased and read with the complete Shabad. Its application to the shared initiation is the essay’s argument; the example is hypothetical.

SriGranth, Panna 349

[7] Protection and restraint. The Committee’s account of Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji supplies the succession in 1606 and the two-swords reference, not the governing interpretation. Salok Mahalla 9, Guru Tegh Bahadur Sahib Ji, complete Salok 16, Panna 1427, is paraphrased. The Salok does not prescribe the kirpan; its application to carrying one is the essay’s argument.

Guru Hargobind Sahib Ji: historical account · SriGranth, Panna 1427

[8] Oak Creek interview. Laird Harrison, KQED, 6 August 2012; updated 16 July 2024. The edited interview by Mina Kim with Mandeep Singh Dhillon supplies the connection between visibility and protecting the defenceless. It is a contemporary statement of responsibility, not evidence for the historical origin of the five Ks.

KQED interview

The plain-English meanings are the author’s learning aids, informed by the cited commentary. Practical applications are not additional words in Gurbani.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London

A modern Akhand Paath normally runs for about forty-eight hours. Readers take turns, and listeners are meant to take turns too. That keeps the reading unbroken. It does not mean that anyone has heard and understood the whole reading. Gurbani asks us to notice that difference.

I had almost finished this article when I realised that one sentence was shielding me from the harder question.

I had written:

“Akhand Paath itself is not the problem.”

It sounded careful. It allowed me to criticise the way Akhand Paath is sometimes arranged without examining whether the form itself may also create a difficulty.

Then one word in Japji Sahib stopped me:

ਗਾਵੀਐ ਸੁਣੀਐ ਮਨਿ ਰਖੀਐ ਭਾਉ ॥

gaaveeai suneeai man rakheeai bhaau.

Sing, listen, and hold love within the mind.

Japji Sahib, Pauri 5, Ang 2, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji. This is one line from the pauri; the pauri continues.

The word was:

ਸੁਣੀਐ

suneeai.

Listen.

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji does not stop when the sound is made. The line moves from singing to listening, and from listening to something being held within the mind in love.

That made me ask a simple question.

Who listens?

I do not mean who attends when the Paath begins, who makes the donation, who provides the langar or who returns for the bhog at the end.

I mean who listens to the reading itself.

What is continuous?

The official English Sikh Rehat Maryada currently hosted by the SGPC says that an Akhand Paath takes approximately forty-eight hours. That is the recognised modern form: about two days and two nights of uninterrupted reading, carried by several readers taking turns.

The Maryada does not prescribe a fixed number of readers. It does insist that the reading must be clear and correct. Reading so quickly that a listener cannot follow is described as irreverence. Proper attention must be given to pronunciation, even when that causes the reading to take a little longer.

The forty-eight hours are therefore a normal working period. They are not a sacred deadline which must be met by rushing.

No one person is expected to remain awake for the entire reading. Readers change because human beings need sleep. If the Paath is to be heard throughout, listeners must also take turns.

A relative may sit for an hour during the day. Someone else may come during the night. Another family member may listen the following morning.

Even when this is done honestly, each person hears only part of the reading.

The Paath is continuous.

No one person’s listening is.

This does not make the Paath worthless. Gurbani is not ordinary information which becomes valuable only after an English explanation has been attached to it. Its Gurmukhi form, sound, rhythm and recitation matter. A single line may steady someone in grief before that person can explain what has happened within.

But the Guru has not spoken merely so that sacred sound may continue.

The Sikh Rehat Maryada expects the family or congregation undertaking an Akhand Paath to carry it out through its own members, relatives and friends. A person who cannot read is told to listen to a competent reader. The Maryada then says that the reader must not be left carrying on alone while no member of the family or congregation is listening.

That instruction is far removed from a Paath purchased from others and collected at the end.

Neither a donation, food for the readers nor attendance at the bhog can substitute for listening. Returning at the end cannot turn the parts we missed into something we heard.

The same Maryada makes a related point when explaining Hukam. Merely lifting the covering, looking at the exposed page and leaving without taking Hukam is contrary to Gurmat. Physical nearness and a respectful glance do not replace receiving the Guru’s command.

The principle is the same. Being near the reading is not necessarily the same as coming under what is read.

An Akhand Paath can be a continuous communal act of recitation, supported by a relay of listeners. It is not one person hearing and understanding the complete reading of Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji from beginning to end.

Uninterrupted completion and complete reception are not the same thing.

What the history allows us to say

I had also assumed that the history of Akhand Paath would give a simple answer. I expected to find that one of the Gurus had established the modern forty-eight-hour form.

I did not find secure evidence for that claim.

Before Guru Arjan Sahib Ji compiled and installed the Adi Granth at Sri Harmandir Sahib in 1604, there could not have been a reading of that complete compiled volume. The installation placed the compiled Bani at the centre of Sikh life, with Baba Buddha Ji serving as its first granthi. It does not, by itself, establish the later forty-eight-hour relay.

Bhai Gurdas Ji gives us a revealing picture of Kartarpur in Vaar 1, Pauri 38. Bani is uttered. So Dar and Aarti are sung. Jap is recited at Amrit Vela. Alongside this, there is giaan gosat and charcha: discussion and vichaar.

Bhai Gurdas Ji does not carry the authority of Gurbani, and the pauri is not a full daily timetable. Yet the picture matters. Recitation, singing, listening and discussion have not been pulled apart.

Bani is not passing over a community which has organised itself not to hear.

The Encyclopaedia of Sikhism, published by Punjabi University, Patiala, says that when and how the custom of Akhand Paath began is not known. It offers a reasoned conjecture that the practice developed during the dangerous conditions of the eighteenth century, when persecution had scattered Sikhs and settled religious life could not be taken for granted. It also describes listeners coming and going, receiving different portions of Bani at different times.

Gurinder Singh Mann points to late eighteenth-century evidence of uninterrupted complete readings. The source he discusses, Guru Kian Sakhian, is dated by its editors to 1790. That gives us evidence that the practice was present by the late eighteenth century. It does not establish the precise moment when the first Akhand Paath took place.

The responsible historical conclusion is therefore modest.

Reading, singing, listening and discussing Bani belong to the Guru period. The compiled Adi Granth stood at the centre of Sikh life from 1604. The uninterrupted complete reading is securely visible later. Its exact beginning remains uncertain.

A later origin would not make the practice wrong. The Panth has developed disciplines in response to changing circumstances. If Akhand Paath grew during persecution, its history may carry courage, urgency and collective devotion. Sikhs living under threat may not have known how long they could remain safely in one place.

But that possibility opens a question rather than closing one.

Should a form shaped partly by danger and uncertainty automatically remain the normal or preferred way for settled families in London, Birmingham, Toronto, Vancouver or Amritsar to engage with the complete reading today?

History can help us ask the question, but Gurbani must govern the answer.

Amrit Vela is a beginning, not a boundary

While revising the article, another question came to me.

Is Amrit Vela only a period before dawn? Do not all twenty-four hours belong to remembrance? Are not all the hours, minutes and breaths available for Bani to enter the human mind?

The careful answer requires us to hold two things together.

Japji Sahib says:

ਅੰਮ੍ਰਿਤ ਵੇਲਾ ਸਚੁ ਨਾਉ ਵਡਿਆਈ ਵੀਚਾਰੁ ॥

amrit velaa sach naau vadiaaee veechaar.

At Amrit Vela, remember the True Naam and reflect upon the Greatness.

Japji Sahib, Pauri 4, Ang 2, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji. This is one line from the pauri; the pauri continues.

Amrit Vela has a real early-morning meaning. Professor Sahib Singh Ji reads it as the dawn or pre-dawn period, when the mind may be less occupied by the noise and demands of the day.

But the value of the time does not lie in the clock alone.

Guru Nanak Sahib Ji joins the time to Sach Naam and vadiaaee veechaar: remembrance of the True Naam and reflection upon Divine greatness.

Getting up early is not the whole teaching. A person can rise before dawn and still spend the time distracted, proud, hurried or mechanically completing a duty.

The hour serves remembrance and vichaar. It does not possess spiritual force apart from them.

Gurbani then carries the direction beyond the early morning:

ਸਭੇ ਵੇਲਾ ਵਖਤ ਸਭਿ ਜੇ ਅਠੀ ਭਉ ਹੋਇ ॥
ਨਾਨਕ ਸਾਹਿਬੁ ਮਨਿ ਵਸੈ ਸਚਾ ਨਾਵਣੁ ਹੋਇ ॥੧॥

sabhe velaa vakhat sabh je athee bhau hoi.
naanak saahib man vasai sachaa naavan hoi.

When reverent awareness remains through all eight watches, every time and moment comes under it. O Nanak, when the Master dwells within the mind, the cleansing is true.

Majh Ki Vaar, Salok Mahalla 1, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji. The Salok begins on Ang 145; these closing two lines are on Ang 146.

The eight watches are the whole day and night. Amrit Vela therefore gives the Sikh a disciplined beginning. It is not meant to create one religious part of the day followed by hours of forgetfulness.

What begins before dawn must enter the morning journey, the workplace, the home, the difficult conversation, the handling of money, the exercise of power and the way another person is treated.

Guru Arjan Sahib Ji says:

ਸਾਸਿ ਸਾਸਿ ਸਿਮਰਹੁ ਗੋਬਿੰਦ ॥
ਮਨ ਅੰਤਰ ਕੀ ਉਤਰੈ ਚਿੰਦ ॥

saas saas simrahu gobind.
man antar kee utrai chind.

With every breath, remember Gobind; the anxiety within the mind departs.

Gauri Sukhmani, Ashtapadi 24, Pauri 1, Mahalla 5, Ang 295, Guru Arjan Sahib Ji. These are two lines from the pauri; the pauri continues.

This reaches beyond hours and minutes to the breath itself.

The early-morning discipline is real. Its fulfilment is not confined to the morning. Gurbani carries remembrance through all eight watches and every breath.

In that sense, every hour belongs to the One. No minute is outside Naam. No part of life is meant to stand beyond the correction of the Shabad.

This matters for the question of Akhand Paath.

A twenty-four-hour Sikh life does not mean twenty-four-hour audible recitation. Human beings sleep, work, raise children, care for parents, earn a living and meet responsibilities. Gurbani does not ask us to keep our mouths moving every second.

It asks that remembrance should not end when recitation ends.

The aim is not unbroken sound.

It is continuing answerability to the Guru.

When the clock begins to rule

Forty-eight hours can serve a useful practical purpose. It can organise the relay. It can tell readers when their turns begin. It can help a family prepare for two days and two nights of continuous reading.

The difficulty begins when the clock stops serving the Shabad and the Shabad is made to serve the clock.

A reader begins to hurry because the bhog has been announced for a fixed time. A family attends when the Paath begins, disappears for most of the reading and returns at the end. Payment, food and attendance at the conclusion come to stand in for the listening that did not happen.

Several Akhand Paaths may be accepted because readers can be supplied. But every reading also requires a listening Sangat. If an institution can provide paathis more easily than it can identify listeners, it has multiplied recitation while multiplying the absence around it.

Repeated discipline, set times and Maryada are not the problem. Sikhi needs all three. Ritualism begins when completing the form allows us to avoid what the form was meant to serve.

The final Ang is reached, so we assume the Guru has been received. The bhog takes place, so we assume the family’s duty has been completed. The clock reaches the expected time, so we assume that something spiritual has been achieved.

None of those conclusions follows automatically.

A bhog can tell us that the reading ended. It cannot tell us whether the family listened, whether Rahao was noticed, whether one line remained in the mind, or whether anything in life came under correction.

If Guru Nanak Sahib Ji were teaching in the room, would I bow, sit for a few minutes, leave while the teaching continued, and return for the final words?

The Guru before us is Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji. That makes the question more serious, not less.

Why have we accepted a pattern in which the Guru may continue speaking to an almost empty room?

A slower way back

I do not believe one writer should abolish Akhand Paath by personal decree.

It stands within the Sikh Rehat Maryada and has become part of Panthic life. When a family or Sangat undertakes it honestly, remains present through a genuine rota, supports clear readers and listens with attention, it can be a serious collective discipline. Its continuity may express a shared act of devotion even though no individual hears the complete reading.

But I no longer think it should be treated as the automatic or spiritually superior choice for every birth, death, anniversary, new home or family difficulty.

For many families, Sadharan Paath may be the more truthful way to receive the complete reading.

The Sikh Rehat Maryada recommends that a Sikh carry on a full intermittent reading and complete it over one or two months, or over a longer period. That slower form allows a family to return. People can read, sleep, work and come back the following day. They can remember where the reading had reached. There is time to pause at Rahao, ask about an unfamiliar word and allow one Shabad to remain before the next one arrives.

A child may begin to recognise the movement of the reading rather than appearing only for its beginning and end. Someone whose Panjabi is limited can use a learning aid and ask what has been read. An older relative who knows the sound of Bani may share that inheritance with someone who needs the meaning explained in English.

A slower Paath may look less impressive. There may be no intensive weekend programme and no large gathering at the end. It asks the family to keep returning after the public occasion has passed.

That may be its strength.

When a family approaches a gurdwara, the first discussion should not be limited to the date, donation and time of bhog. Someone should ask who will read, who will listen, how the family will take part, and whether Sadharan Paath would allow more honest participation.

Where Akhand Paath is chosen, a real listening rota should exist before the reading begins. Clarity should take priority over the advertised finish. If correct reading takes longer than forty-eight hours, it should take longer. The Maryada already places clear reading above speed.

Those whose Panjabi is limited should be helped to follow where the reading has reached. The Hukam should be explained. Selected Shabads should be opened for the family. No claim should be made that payment or uninterrupted completion automatically removes suffering, guarantees success or transfers spiritual benefit to someone who has not listened.

Where a family intends to attend only the beginning and the end, the gurdwara should be willing to recommend a slower Paath instead.

This is not an argument for reducing Paath. It is an argument for restoring Paath to listening, vichaar and life under the Guru.

Japji Sahib gives extraordinary weight to one teaching truly heard:

ਮਤਿ ਵਿਚਿ ਰਤਨ ਜਵਾਹਰ ਮਾਣਿਕ ਜੇ ਇਕ ਗੁਰ ਕੀ ਸਿਖ ਸੁਣੀ ॥

mat vich ratan javaahar maanik je ik gur kee sikh sunee.

Within the understanding are jewels, gems and rubies, if even one teaching of the Guru is heard.

Japji Sahib, Pauri 6, Ang 2, Guru Nanak Sahib Ji. This is one line from the pauri; the pauri continues.

This line does not place one teaching against the wholeness of Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji. The whole is Guru.

It tells us how the Guru enters the person.

One teaching must be heard deeply enough for jewels to arise within the mat, the understanding.

That is what our practice should protect.

Akhand Paath may remain where a family and Sangat can carry it honestly. It should not hide the absence of the family or Sangat. Sadharan Paath should be restored as a normal and serious way of reading Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji in full. The forty-eight-hour period should remain a practical guide, not a spiritual achievement.

And Amrit Vela should not be reduced to another sacred clock.

It gives the Sikh a disciplined beginning. Gurbani then carries that beginning into all eight watches and every breath. What is heard before dawn should enter the whole day. What is read in the gurdwara should enter the home. What passes through the ears should be held within and become conduct.

I return to the line which changed this article:

ਗਾਵੀਐ ਸੁਣੀਐ ਮਨਿ ਰਖੀਐ ਭਾਉ ॥

gaaveeai suneeai man rakheeai bhaau.

Sing, listen, and hold love within the mind.

We have worked hard to keep the Paath going. That care deserves respect. Generations of readers have preserved pronunciation, continuity and reverence. Families have turned to Bani in grief and gratitude. Gurdwaras have kept Guru Sahib at the centre of Sikh community life.

The question is whether we have left enough room for the rest of Guru Nanak Sahib Ji’s line.

The clock can tell us when the final Ang was reached.

It cannot tell us whether the Guru was heard.

Verification and sources

The Gurmukhi text, Ang references, Bani headings, Mahalla attributions and textual boundaries in this article were checked against SearchGurbani and SriGranth. Professor Sahib Singh Ji’s Guru Granth Darpan was consulted additionally for context and the plain-English senses. The renderings are learning aids. They do not replace the Gurmukhi or the need to read each pauri and Salok in its full setting.

Cross-check: Every Gurmukhi line, Ang reference and attribution in this article can be checked at SearchGurbani.com and SriGranth.org.

Correction note: If a mismatch is found in the Gurmukhi, Ang reference, Bani heading, Mahalla attribution, transliteration, English sense or historical description, PanthSeva will correct it publicly, calmly and with a dated correction note.

Source note: The reading of Amrit Vela in this article keeps both parts of the Gurbani evidence together. Japji Sahib gives an early-morning discipline joined to Sach Naam and vichaar. The Majh Ki Vaar Salok carries remembrance through all eight watches, and Sukhmani Sahib speaks of remembrance with every breath. The article therefore does not redefine Amrit Vela as a literal twenty-four-hour clock period. It argues that the practice begun there is meant to shape the whole day.

The official English Sikh Rehat Maryada currently hosted by the SGPC is used for its provisions on Hukam, Sadharan Paath and Akhand Paath. The linked PDF omits the letter (d) and labels the Sadharan Paath paragraph (e); other standard English editions label the same provision Article VIII(d). Article IX says Akhand Paath takes approximately forty-eight hours, requires clear and correct reading, allows a little longer where care requires it, expects participation by the family or congregation, and requires a listener to be present.

The historical discussion draws upon the SGPC’s account of the 1604 compilation and installation of the Adi Granth; Bhai Gurdas Ji, Vaar 1, Pauri 38; Harbans Singh, editor-in-chief, The Encyclopaedia of Sikhism, Volume I, entry “Akhand Path”, pp. 63-64; and Gurinder Singh Mann, “Sri Gur Panth Prakash: Its Text, Context, and Significance”, Journal of Sikh and Punjab Studies, volume 23, numbers 1 and 2, 2016, p. 35 and note 49.

Historical and source claims were checked to 20 August 2026.

The historical and Maryada sources identify the development and regulation of the practice. They do not govern the doctrinal judgement.

That judgement remains answerable to Shabad Guru Granth Sahib Ji.

Strong disagreement is welcome. Contempt is not.

Bhul chuk maaf karni Ji.

Gurjit Singh Sandhu
PanthSeva
London