Singapore Slingh Dasam Granth (Prologue)

Waheguru Ji Ka Khalsa;
Waheguru Ji Ki Fateh.

For the past year or so, I have been reading up on Dasam Granth Sahib. So far, I have read all of it, except its biggest chapter CharitoPakhyan (as it is very difficult to find resources online that can translate it to English).

Before I go on and start my own opinions about the various chapters in Dasam Granth Sahib, I would like to refer to Dasam Granth itself, its controversies and why I started reading it.

The controversy

Dasam Granth is a collection of Bani by Guru Gobind Singh Sahib Ji. It is written separately from Sri Gurun Granth Sahib Ji, where only one Dohra (couplet) is attributed to our Tenth Master.  It is written in different chapters. In my opinion, it is also mean to be written in smaller different Granths as each chapter is unique. Also, SGGS Ji is largely written in Raags, DGS is mainly written in Chands.

There was / is a lot of controversy about its authenticity. Some say that since Guru Gobind Singh Ji did not add his bani into the SGGS Ji, hence why should he set aside a completely different Granth for his writings?  Some question why Dasam Granth is more akin to Holy books of other religions which are story-based; as compared to SGGS Ji which is much more philosophical and its writings in its entirety are about God.

Proponents of DGS argue that since the Amrit Banis, of which Jaap Sahib, Tav Prasad Savaiye and Chaupai Sahib are Dasam Bani, are not refuted, why should Akal Ustat and CharitoPakhyan? Also we start the Ardas with the first Pauri of Chandi di Vaar, why should we not believe in Chandi di Vaar fully? In every version of the Rehraas (there are a few); we read the Savaiye (pahe gage..); why don't we then accept the chapter of the 24 Avtaars? Also,

This debate has been settled by the Akal Takhat  and I think we as Sikhs should follow suit. Lets stop this bickering and the division of our Panth. And rather than saber rattling, lets put it this way. Read Dasam Granth Sahib fully, if you disagree, do so. But do not insist on others in doing so.

Dasam Granth Sahib Ji shown beside Guru Granth Sahib Ji in an old painting.

Personal Journey

Initially, reading comments online, I was vehement against the DGS. I am one who is strictly monotheist and do not believe in the Hindu Gods and Goddess. I am a man of strict logic which was why I really liked the straight forward nature of Sikhi; Naam, Seva and standing up for what is right even when it is tough and not ask anything back in return. DGS was portrayed as something completely different; and in many ways it is.

It was my Mama G, (mother's brother); who really opened my eyes. For all DGS doubters take note of this logic. If you are correct that the DGS is not written by Sri Guru Gobind Singh Ji, then you are smarter than a lot of people out there and fools read the DGS. But if you are wrong, you have insulted the words of our Tenth Master. Would you want to risk that?

As I read on the DGS, there are parts that are absolutely beautiful and some others that, I myself wonder why its there. One would realize reading DGS is that other than Chandiji, no other diety is perfect in Guru Ji's eyes other than ChandiJi; and even then, Guru Gobind Singh Ji notes that she also was made. She also has a Joon and is not Ajooni (as in mool mantar)

Lastly, I would like to stress that the fact that I am not a Gyani, a learned person and definitely not a Maha-Purakh. I am just a Sikh that read the DGS and wants to share what I think about it.

Bhulla Chuka Ma'af.

Tragedy around FIBA Controversy all round

It deeply saddens me that 2 Sikh players from India, including their captain, cut their hair so that they could play basketball for their country in the Asian games. I wish to speak about this in various angles.

Firstly, lets talk about FIBA. FIBA is the international Basketball authority. They banned "headgear" in all their sports without giving any good explanation. I get the reason some people think Sikhs should wear helmets in the army or on motorcycles, but to ban it on the basketball court? Really? Why? Because it makes people look different? Skin color make us look different, hairstyles make us different, our NAMES makes us different; they team that we play for is different, are we going to make all the above uniform? Is FIBA really that stupid to be scared of being different? 

Sport is a great unifying force of good. Countless people exit poverty by lighting up our television sets; and indirectly our lives; with  the talent they display in their sport. Jesse Owens and Milkha Singh smashed stereotypes along with their world records. It shows the most human of emotions, the joy of success, the agony of defeat. By playing together, you build camaraderie. No matter from which part of the world you are, you are on that court / pitch / field / gym (etc) competing with the person or people next to you. 

Also, due to stupidity, insanity or (at worst) racism, of FIBA, we should appreciate so many other institutions that are not like that. FIFA and every football association around the world, FIH, NHL and every hockey association in the world, every boxing association, every MMA association (lets Sikhs keep hair), Wrestling etc.... 

Singaporean Sikhs who practice our religion like me, should also appreciate this. I played hockey and volleyball in school. No one ever made my turban an issue. Like every Singaporean son, I served NS and Reservist, but never had issues with my turban. This stupid incident really makes me appreciate my country. 

Sikh Basketball player

Lastly, from a Sikh perspective, how sad is this? Where is the uproar? Some bits here and there, but where was the full blown action? Honey Singh saying stuff on Youtube is nothing close to sufficient. Why is Manmohan Singh quiet? Where are all the Sikhs that only seem to have loud voices in arguments and fights? Where are all the prominent Sikhs that did not demand an action? What would Israel do if circumcision banned from basketball? What would Muslims do if the name Muhammed was banned? Why were we so pathetically quiet?

At a personal level, I would have walked out of the Asian games if I was in the 2 Sikh's shoes. Qatari women showed the world how its done when they walked away. Many often say that I have an extreme point of view with regards to this, but I believe it is right. Clear lines has got to be drawn in the sand.

This is also the reason, I do not tie my beard. I am not against it on religious grounds, my problem is with its reasoning. Sikhs tie beards because other people (sometimes other Sikhs) are uncomfortable with it. They may call it untidy, out of times, ill-disciplined. My point is that if people are uncomfortable with our beards what are they going to be uncomfortable with next? Our Turbans? Our unshorn hair? Etc.. We are okay with organizations like FIBA blanketly banning our turbans, just like we are okay with organizations that never hire practicing Sikhs

I get it that some professions like surgeons or chefs; they need to tie their beard so as to not let it fall during an operation or in someone else's food. To me that is understandable, what I do not understand is why a computer programmer needs to tie his beard too. Scared beard fall into keyboard? <:)==

Gay and Sikhi

Why in the world am I writing about gay issues again? I am wondering so myself. I am not gay. I do not hate gays. I do not have many gay friends; nor am I thinking about this 24 /7.

But there were a lot of people that were furious regarding Sikh Knowledge, a rapper from Canada, kissing a Muslim man in Canada. They were protesting laws against gay sex in India call  Section 377. There were some morons making stupid threats. There were others that felt that he embarrassed his Pagh (Turban), and he should cut his hair as a result of it.

I felt that I should clarify the my interpretation of Sikh Religion's position on this issue on twitter and whilst doing so, I got a tweet back from Sikh Knowledge saying that I was not having enough sex. Kind of weird, then I tried to clarify it further and felt that it took too many tweets, hence I decided to try to put what I have on my mind in this blog.

Yes, I am not an authority on Sikhi, but there is only ever 1 true authority on Sikhi and that is the Guru Granth Sahib Ji. In the Guru Granth Sahib Ji, there is not one word, not one word, that criticizes a person for being gay. Do not believe me, find it here. None.

From word one to the 2nd last Ang of Guru Granth Sahib Ji, it is all about God and nothing else. (The last Paath in Guru Ji is Raag Mahalla, about the music mode of the banis). It is pure and its message is all loving. God is for all. If Guru Ji does not discriminate, why then the rest of us?

But in the Sikh Panth, marriage, is between a man and a woman. Some use quotes in Guru Ji which talks about how lady-soul want to entice her Husband-God. In my opinion, I think that is of spiritual nature and how all of us should be wanting to reach god and be hungry for His Name.

However, I would go to the 52 last orders of Guru Gobind Singh Ji, in which, rule number 14 states that all marriage must be done via Anand Karaj. Anand Karaj states that marriage is strictly between a man and a woman. Yes, as mentioned earlier, the bani was written to be Spiritual in nature. But it is Guru Gobind Singh Ji that gave the order that made it that human beings, not just our souls, are to partake in the marriage. So therefore in a Sikh point of view, marriage is between a man and a woman.

Furthermore, there is no sex outside marriage in Sikhi, be it with a man or a woman. This also implies that gay sex is not allowed. What I state is the fact, but I hope that I did not insult anyone.

Lastly, I think it is ridiculous asking a gay Sikh to cut hair? Do we tell a person that drinks or smoke to cut their hair? Do we tell a person that eats meat to cut their hair? So why should we tell a person who is gay to do so? So why are we having double standards when it comes to this?

Rab Rakha.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JcNg4b5A5MA -- Anand Kaaraj.

No politics for a while

Sorry to inform you that there would not be any political material on this site till the laws in Singapore becomes conducive to do so. It is simply ridiculous for me to risk my life and liberty in my country so that I can post blogs here leisurely. 

Lets face it, I am not some big time blogger that the government should even be bothered about. Roughly, only one person a day comes onto this blogs, where I at times do not spend months on.In fact, I think that the government should not be even bothered about blogs, period. 

But the Government does bother about blogs. I fear that if they do not like what I say, I will be targeted. I am 99.99% sure that I am insignificant to the Government, but the 0.01% chance is not one that I would want to take. 

You may find that what I have written here is cowardice, but I hope that you respect this decision that I cannot write Singapore related issues for a while. 

 

Why Sikhs do not worship Hindu Gods

A beloved cousin of mine asked me yesterday.

: " You see in the translation of the Gurbani Kirtan that it is being sung, that there are a lot of Hindu gods in it; so why is it that Sikhs are not allowed to do a pooja of Hindu Gods?"

The most obvious Gurbani that would answer this is :

 Swaiyaa

Paahe gahe jab te tumre tab te kou aankh tare nahi aanyo|| Raam Raheem Puraan Kuraan aneyk kahai mat eyk na maanyo||

O God ! the day when I caught hold of your feet, I do not bring anyone else under my sight; none other is liked by me now; the Puranas and the Quran try to know Thee by the names of Ram and Rahim and talk about you through several stories, but I do not ac

Sinmrit Shaastra Bed sabhai bahu bhed kahai ham ek naa jaanyo|| Sri asipaan kripaa tumri kar mai na kahyo sabh tohe bakhaanyo||863||

The Simritis, Shastras and Vedas describe several mysteries of yours, but I do not agree with any of them. O sword-wielder God! This all has been described by Thy Grace, what power can I have to write all this? (863)

Dohraa

Sagal duaar kau chhaad kai gahyo tuhaaro duaar|| Bahe gahe ki laaj as Gobind daas tuhaar||864||
O Lord ! I have forsaken all other doors and have caught hold of only Thy door. O Lord ! Thou has caught hold of my arm; I, Govind, am Thy serf, kindly take (care of me and) protect my honour. (864)
 

In Sri Guru Granth Sahib Ji, mentions of Hindu Gods are usually metaphorical. It is not a physical god. There are Hindu names of Gods that are used.

E.g. Mohan, Gobind, Gopal, Hari, Ram are used in names to describe God but are not the Hindu Dieties themselves. On the other hand, Raheem, Kareem, Allah used in Guru Ji is its equivalent to its Muslim meaning in the Quran.

Hari is used to describe God that is not attached to Maya; not Vishnu. Ram is used to describe the name of God with regards to peace not Ram Chand. Ram Chand himself is mentioned only 8 times in the Sri Guru Granth Sahibji.

Its like some Sikh kid named Gobind, Hargobind, Angad, Amar or Harkrishan. They might be named after our Gurus but are not our Gurus. A Christian named Jesus is not Jesus Christ. Muslims named Muhammed are not the Prophet nor are the Muslims named  Kareem or Rafiq Gods. In the same way, our Granth Sahib refers to god in many names like  Mohan, Gobind, Gopal, Hari or Ram, but not it does not recognize them as God.

Lets voice our differences not go to war about it

This is with reference to this article on yahoo. http://sg.news.yahoo.com/growing-debate-online-over-repeal-of-section-377a--095505691.html
Basically, some priests in Singapore speak out against what they seem as a rising tide of homosexuality.
Firstly, I am not bothered at all that our former Prime Minister, Goh Chok Tong, was in the audience when one of the pastors was speaking. He was there listening and should not shoulder any blame for what the Pastor said.
In my personal opinion, I really do not have any malice or preference to gays being in Singapore. If you want to be gay, be gay. Your life, your wish. I also do not think that gay people are detrimental to the Singaporean society having had served National Service with them. Just because you have gay friends; that does not mean that you would be gay too.
People can also follow religion where they say that its not okay to be gay if they want to. It is their right and wish to do so. The rest of Singapore, who may think otherwise, should respect this fact too. That being said, these kinds of matters should be of a personal matter and not one to be pressured or impressed upon society.
I am a practising Sikh. I do not cut my hair. I am a vegetarian and I follow a religion that say that it is not okay to eat meat or cut our hair. In the same manner that I do not go around trying to force Singapore not to eat meat or to close down barber shops, Churches too should respect individual right to be gay if they want to.
This brings me this major point upon Pastor Yang Tuck Yoong comment where he referred to this as a war. This is where I think the Pastor crossed the line. Pastor Yang, we should never be in a proverbial or actual war with another. We are Singaporeans, regardless of whatever one thinks or believe in.
We are Singaporean regardless of race, language, RELIGION, thought and so on. We are Singaporeans, Christians, Muslim, Buddhist, Free thinkers, Hindus or Sikhs. We are Singaporeans, Chinese, Malay, Indian, Eurasian or others. We are Singaporeans straight or gay. We are Singaporeans whether we support the PAP, or the Workers Party, or any candidate that we feel is best. We are Singaporeans, Pastor Yang; first and foremost.
Just as we have different races, religions and political affiliation, we have differences in the way we think. To change one's thought process, one should talk and persuade, not go on a warpath. We are an intelligent society. Let us decide if it is okay to be gay or not okay to be gay. You tell us your point of view and then let us decide.
Do not even talk about war against how we think. That sets a very dangerous precedent. If it is okay that we go to war with people who are gay, are PAP supporters going to then start a war with the Worker's Party supporters next? What if we go to war because we are if a different race?
To cap things off, I have absolutely no idea if there are homosexual activist who are going around waging war against the church or anything like that. If they are, then they should be ashamed. If they are just going against 377A, then I think it is okay.

My wish for Singapore politics

A very intersting article was posted on Yahoo Singapore today discussing author's wish for PAP. Here is the link to the second part of the article.

That got me thinking as to what I want from Singapore in terms of politics.  Here are 4 things I came up with.

1) A seperation from the law-making and the running the estate elements of Government. I would wish that the people making the laws and the people running our estates be different. In my opinion, there is a different skill involved in running an estate locally as compared to making laws for a country to run nationally. I also do not intend it to be a upper house, lower house kind of governance like other countries, but 2 bodies with different duties. One deals with local issues with regards to the estate, and the other deals with how this country is run.

2) Lets elect our and empower our Mayors. Many Singaporeans do not even know that we have 5 Mayors in Singapore and less of us even know what in the world do they do. I propose that Mayors be empowered, like in many other countries, to run the CDCs. Let them face all the problems on the ground like upgrading and cleaning carparks and so on. Let people choose who they want for these roles.

3) Empower our President. I believe that we should empower our President for there to be more check and balances of power. I think that the President, who is paid a lot, should be the person who actively chooses which elected MP belongs to which ministry and that which Ministry should be there in the first place. This would expand the role of the President who currently appoints the Prime Minister.


4) Greater representative democracy. Another condition that needs to be added in is that if a party wins x percentage of seats, then that party should, have to the best of abilities, have x% of seats in the cabinet. That would improve Singapore's Standing as a representative democracy. So if party X wins 5% of the vote and there are 21 cabinet positions, then at least 1 seat needs to go to party X. This would make situations more fair and gives public a chance to see what the opposition parties are made of.