Militant Khalsa or Saintly Warriors?

Among the western scholars as well as some Indian writers, the figure of Khalsa was always a group of people who were warriors. The misconception of some Europeans was that at the time of the tenth guru, the Sikhs were armed. This doubt was cleared by next set of writers who wrote about the Sikhs. With time, the usage of different words also changed, and perhaps their definitions also.

What caused my focus on the current editorial is the word ‘Militant’. Macauliffe used the militant word for the tenth guru.[1] Including the so-called Sikh writer Khushwant Singh.[2] In the beginning of the early 20^th century or before that, the conception of the word ‘militant’ was, perhaps, a group of people revolting against the establishment. That must have set the examples to use this word for any person who might’ve inspired to pick the weapons.

Later, especially during the Kharku Lehar in Punjab in 1980s and 1990s, the word militant became synonym with terrorist. However, some journalists use the word militant for those who have picked the weapons against the government.[3] From the perspective of the armed forces, the Punjab time of Kharku Lehar is called as ‘terrorism’.[4] Some neutral people call it the ‘militant time’. The Sikhs who believe in Sant Jarnail Singh Bhindwarale and him standing against the government to keep the Sikh Faith and to argue against the propaganda of the establishment label the time as ‘Kharku Lehar’.

The general definition of the word ‘militant’ from Collins[5] and Cambridge[6] doesn’t show it some kind of terrorist. However, the definition of ‘terrorist’ is somewhat similarly mentioned by Cambridge, but differently by Collins.[7] In my own understanding, a militant might not be a terrorist but a terrorist can’t be a militant. I believe a militant movement does have violent methods. On the other hand, a terrorist activity will involve only the killing of innocent. Now, I won’t go around to talk about who innocent is; there is a wide spectrum about this definition which involves one’s own thoughts.

Anyway, the motive behind writing the definitions was that in a social science paper a question was asked: in which militant sect the tenth guru transformed the Sikhs into.[i] This was brought into light by Manjinder Singh Sirsa on his FB post. To some extent, I really like this guy who has been talking about Sikhi openly without caring much about what people will be calling him. Although, in one of his interviews he talked about building a temple at the Babri Masjid.[8] That touch should not be there. If he really is taking a stand, he should talk about Gurdwara Gian Godhri also.

Similarly, there should be more Sikh politicians who’re actively talking about the Sikh and Punjab issues, while refraining themselves about commenting on the non-Sikh topics because in the future people will remember the comments of these politicians.

Anyway, the efforts of Manjinder Singh Sirsa didn’t get wasted. The electronic media published a piece of story, and then the school wrote a written apology which was shared by Sirsa on his FB post.[ii]

So who is the Khalsa then? Is it a militant force that just looks for a fight? Or is it the common misconception that’s grown in the minds of many? The answers to these questions can be seen in the writing of none other than the tenth guru, who created the Mighty Khalsa.

ਖ਼ਾਲਸਾ ਮੇਰੋ ਧਰਮ – ਰੁ ਕਰਮ ॥ ਖ਼ਾਲਸਾ ਮੇਰੁ ਭੇਦ ਨਿਜ – ਮਰਮ ॥ ਖ਼ਾਲਸਾ ਮੇਰੋ ਸਤਿਗੁਰੁ ਪੂਰਾ ॥ ਖ਼ਾਲਸਾ ਮੇਰੋ ਸ੍ਵਜਨ – ਸੂਰਾ ॥੭॥

These verses[9] here do not have the meaning the Khalsa is some militant or some violent people on the rampage. The Guru showed no difference between the Khalsa and himself. The two were same. Not only the same, but his satguru also, his own warrior, etc. Khalsa is the form of the Guru. Khalsa is but Saintly Warriors.

---

[1] The interior is surrounded by a wall of martial implements emblematic of the militant side of the Guru's character. – The Sikh Religion, Part V, p.246

[2] In A History of the Sikhs Vol I the writer dedicated chapter 5 to talk about the tenth guru. Its heading was From the Pacifist Sikhs to the Militant Khalsa.

[3] The western journalists while writing about the Middle East rarely use the word terrorists for the armed men against the government. It might be because of their soft-touch for them and repulsion for the oppressive governments.

[4] Works of K.P.S Gill and General Brar could be read.

[5] Collins: You use militant to describe people who believe in something very strongly and are active in trying to bring about political or social change, often in extreme ways that other people find unacceptable.

[6] Cambridge: active, determined, and often willing to use force:

[7] Cambridge: someone who uses violent action, or threats of violent action, for political purposes

Collins: A terrorist is a person who uses violence, especially murder and bombing, in order to achieve political aims.

[8] This two-minute interview was with Republic TV, one of the largest BJP-sided media houses. Sirsa said, ‘It won’t stop. If you’ve built a mosque after demolishing a temple, now a temple will be built after demolishing the mosque.’

[9] In Shri Sarbloh Granth, the tenth guru wrote in detail about the Khalsa in more than 40 verses.

---

[i] Photo taken from the post of Manjinder Singh Sirsa with thanks.

[ii] Photos taken from the post of Manjinder Singh Sirsa with thanks.