Skip to Main Content (access key 1)
Skip to Search (access key 2)
Skip to Search GO (access key 3)
Skip to comments (access key 4)
Skip to navigation (access key 5)
Skip to top of page (access key 6)
Monday, May 21, 2007 | Reason : Wingnut News | print version Print | Comments

Document Cult leader sparks Sikh riots with 'guru' stunt

by Jerome Taylor

Reposted from:
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article2565124.ece

The Indian state of Punjab has been set alight by some of the worst rioting in a decade after a newspaper advert placed by the leader of a controversial religious sect sparked outrage in the region's Sikh community.

One person was killed and more than 50 were injured after tens of thousands of angry Sikhs, many armed with their ceremonial kirpan daggers, went on the rampage across Punjab and the neighbouring state of Haryana.

India's Prime Minister, Manmohan Singh, appealed for calm and put the army on standby as the central government sent thousands of police to the region.

The rioting broke out after the Dera Sacha Sauda sect, a non-profit group that combines social work with spirituality, placed an advert in a local newspaper showing its leader, Baba Gurmeet Singh, allegedly impersonating Sikhism's 10th and last guru, an act most Sikhs would consider deeply offensive.

The advert appeared to show Gurmeet Singh administering a special nectar, known as Jaam-e-Insaan, to his followers while wearing the same long robes worn by the guru, Guru Gobind Singh - who was also known to baptise believers with nectar. Unlike Islam, where picturing the Prophet Mohamed is strictly forbidden, most Sikhs believe it is permissible to picture their gurus, and families often place a picture of the religion's founding father, Guru Nanak Dev, somewhere in their homes. But pretending to be a guru is strictly forbidden.

"Impersonating a Sikh guru always runs the risk of outraging even the most moderate of sikhs," says Jagtar Singh of the Sikh Federation's UK branch. "Even if our schoolchildren were putting on a play about the gurus, we would never get anyone to actually play the role of one.

"Most Sikh groups believe Guru Gobind Singh was the final guru. Some people have since claimed themselves to be living gurus, something which is deeply offensive to most Sikhs."

Gurmeet Singh insists he has done nothing wrong and has refused to apologise for the advert. "I wear whatever my followers give me to wear," he told the New Indian Express from his sect's headquarters in Sirsa, Haryana. "My robes can match anybody's. They don't indicate my inclination towards any particular religion. All religions are the same."

His supporters rejected accusations that he was trying to impersonate the guru. But yesterday police filed a complaint against the sect's leader for hurting religious sentiment, a charge often used in a country where religious differences regularly set off violence.

The Central Bureau of Intelligence, India's equivalent to the FBI, also says Gurmeet Singh is a prime suspect in the murder of an Indian journalist who accused the sect of brainwashing women and sexually assaulting them in 2002.

Many say the rapid response of India's government to the crisis shows their fears that the riots have transformed into a wider protest against what many Sikhs say is the way they are discriminated against by the government.

"The recent protests really have mushroomed into something much bigger," says Jagtar Singh, whose organisation campaigns for the creation of a Sikh homeland called Khalistan.

"There have already been incidents where protesters have been chanting the word 'Khalistan'. The feeling is that now is a good time to protest against the government over Sikh human rights. As long as it remains a political agitation for Sikh rights, we support that. When there is violence, we'll condemn it."

The sect leader

* Whether he's dressed in bright, flowing robes reminiscent of an ancient maharaja, or in the white cloth of a wandering aesthetic, Baba Gurmeet Singh Ram Raheem, who spends much of his time living in a cave on his ashram, has always been a controversial figure. Although his organisation says it discourages donations his favourite mode of transport is a fleet of Mercedes cars, protected by up to 25 bodyguards.

* In 2002, his sect was accused of brainwashing and sexually assaulting female followers. Gurmeet Singh, who prefers his acolytes to call him by his somewhat laborious full title Huzoor Maharaj Sant Gurmeet Ram Raheem Singh Ji, is currently being investigated by police over rape and murder allegations.

* He recently clashed with the Punjab's state government after urging followers to vote for the Congress party, which forms the opposition there. But supporters say his message that all religions are equal attracts hundreds of thousands of genuine followers from low-caste Hindu families as well as from the region's Christian and Sikh communities.

Comments 1 - 38 of 38 |

Reload Comments | Back to Top | Page Numbers

1. Comment #43313 by Logicel on May 21, 2007 at 5:19 am

 avatar"All religions are the same."
_____

Yes. I agree! All religions consist of beliefs based on no evidence whatsoever--however different the imaginary raiments may be in clothing the same naked emperor.

Other Comments by Logicel

2. Comment #43317 by Luthien on May 21, 2007 at 5:27 am

 avatar
One person was killed and more than 50 were injured after tens of thousands of angry Sikhs, many armed with their ceremonial kirpan daggers, went on the rampage across Punjab and the neighbouring state of Haryana.


So much for them only being ceremonial!

Oh, and baptism with nectar was one of the levels of baptism in mithraism ;-)

Other Comments by Luthien

3. Comment #43334 by Azven on May 21, 2007 at 6:13 am

 avatarI think I'm going to look up some confirmations of this story as I find a lot of its elements unbelievable. I also picked up on the ceremonial dagger comment. It's well known that Sikh's carry daggers as one of the five Ks, but all the dagggers I've seen are less than an inch long and less sharp than a ball point pen.

Who benefits from this strory? A government that can point to 'those Sikhs, fighting amongst themselves again' perhaps!

I'm off to Google...

Other Comments by Azven

4. Comment #43343 by Luthien on May 21, 2007 at 6:36 am

 avatar
...all the dagggers I've seen are less than an inch long and less sharp than a ball point pen.


That is an adaptation to western laws, where it would be illegal to carry such weapons around in public.

Other Comments by Luthien

5. Comment #43344 by Vinelectric on May 21, 2007 at 6:37 am

 avatarAzven

Who benefits from this strory? A government that can point to 'those Sikhs, fighting amongst themselves again' perhaps!


The prime minister is Sikh.

Other Comments by Vinelectric

6. Comment #43355 by pewkatchoo on May 21, 2007 at 7:00 am

 avatar
The prime minister is Sikh.


Oh dear, I do hope he will get better soon!

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

7. Comment #43356 by the_blur on May 21, 2007 at 7:00 am

Unintentional hilarity I am sure...

Jaam-e-Insaan -- Does anyone find this rings like: Jam of Insanity?

In which case: Bravo sihks, very well done indeed.

Almost as good as the Mormon angel Moroni, I find most religious people to be Moroni, too.

TATA!

Other Comments by the_blur

8. Comment #43369 by waxwings on May 21, 2007 at 7:32 am

 avatarA traditional kirpan:

scary knife

Looks a bit longer than an inch and a bit sharper than a ball point pen to me.

Other Comments by waxwings

9. Comment #43371 by FXR on May 21, 2007 at 7:38 am

 avatarYou can't carry a knife unless it's a religious knife. But if anyone gets killed by that religious knife someone will come along and say the cause is not religion?

Other Comments by FXR

10. Comment #43410 by konquererz on May 21, 2007 at 10:04 am

 avatarAmazing, they want their own "religious homeland" now as well. Lets just give it to them, like Israel and ocntinue the infighting instead of learning to live together. More religious ridiculousness in my opinion. Equal right? Fabulous! Special religious consideration? Popycock!

Other Comments by konquererz

11. Comment #43411 by pewkatchoo on May 21, 2007 at 10:09 am

 avatarTime for us atheists and agnostics to demand our own homeland methinks.

No bible punchers allowed.

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

12. Comment #43432 by BicycleRepairMan on May 21, 2007 at 11:39 am

 avatar[quote]Time for us atheists and agnostics to demand our own homeland methinks.

No bible punchers allowed.[/quote]
http://www.sealandgov.org/
Buy Sealand? Although we'd have to allow an exception for religions that require pirate costumes ARRRRGH!

Other Comments by BicycleRepairMan

13. Comment #43439 by slummingangel on May 21, 2007 at 12:12 pm

 avatarthinking of setting up my own religion with a ceremonial weapon any suggestions on the weapon was thinking a camán from the irish game hurling (http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Hurling_Ball_and_Hurley.JPG)

Other Comments by slummingangel

14. Comment #43473 by jonjermey on May 21, 2007 at 3:02 pm

Presumably the Sikhs already knew that the Dera Sacha Sauda sect didn't believe in their gurus. So why are they reacting? "You can believe something else to us as long as you don't try and express that belief while we're around." So much for tolerance. Sikhism sounds like a very insecure religion to me.

Other Comments by jonjermey

15. Comment #43481 by CJ22 on May 21, 2007 at 4:16 pm

 avatarIt just goes to show there are no 'peaceful' religions. Followers of any religion can be called to violence at the flick of a switch. Just because they're not big in the suicide-bombing scene at the moment, doesn't mean they don't have violence in their hearts. Offend a faith-head, take your chances.

Other Comments by CJ22

16. Comment #43484 by MelM on May 21, 2007 at 5:20 pm

His supporters rejected accusations that he was trying to impersonate the guru. But yesterday police filed a complaint against the sect's leader for hurting religious sentiment, a charge often used in a country where religious differences regularly set off violence.
Beware! Don't allow this "complait" to come to the U.S. Remember the resolution (by the U.N. Human Rights Council) about defamation of religion?

Other Comments by MelM

17. Comment #43506 by LeeLeeOne on May 21, 2007 at 9:02 pm

 avatarAnd the uneducated (violent, reactionary, slavery) will always be just that... uneducated. Unless, we keep "spreading" the science, and reason, and maturity. (baby steps in evolution?)

Other Comments by LeeLeeOne

18. Comment #43536 by Suki on May 22, 2007 at 12:10 am

I think you are missing the point of the article.

Sikhs are a peaceful people, but like all religions have the right to protest when someone is Blaspheming their religion.

The Kirpan and the other 4 symbols of faith must be worn at all times by Sikhs and is accepted worldwide in all countries. Sikhs have met with President Bush with the Kirpan and other Prime Ministers and world leaders.

The violence was caused by clashes between the sect followers and other Sikhs and for the most part Sikhs protested peacefully.

Other Comments by Suki

19. Comment #43547 by Russell Blackford on May 22, 2007 at 1:24 am

Yeah, right ... "peaceful". Like all those other blood-soaked systems of organised superstition and misery. A bit like how Islam is a "religion of peace", perhaps.

Other Comments by Russell Blackford

20. Comment #43575 by Peacebeuponme on May 22, 2007 at 4:03 am

Suki - yes everyone has the right to free speech and protest. It's usually religion that tries to take this away from us. As the article shows, Baba Gurmeet Singh's rights to freedom of dress were not considered by the sikhs.

Having freedom of expression means that you can disagree with what we say (and call it "blasphemy" if you will), but you do not have the right to request that the state oppress it. Most on this site are passionate about freedom and freedom of protest (which, is after all what most of the email are doing with respect to religion) we do not recognise that "blasphemy" is any kind of crime and in fact is a disgraceful word used to legitimise oppression of free thought.

Other Comments by Peacebeuponme

21. Comment #43577 by leodavinci on May 22, 2007 at 4:05 am

 avatar"Some people have since claimed themselves to be living gurus, something which is deeply offensive to most Sikhs."

So while all the previous gurus where alive were people offended by them,but once they died they realised,oh he's dead now,he must've bee a guru?
Idiots.
How can a creature simultaneously be the most intelligent and most stupid?
The mind boggles

Other Comments by leodavinci

22. Comment #43579 by Peacebeuponme on May 22, 2007 at 4:09 am

Suki - and another thing, I don't care what the knife (that's what it is regardless of what you call it) means to the closed mind of the sikh. They are getting preferential treatment in the UK - I cannot carry a knife, but they can. That is discrimination, plain and simple.

I should start up my own religion that allows me to carry rocket propelled grenades and a glock, but still call myself a man of peace. This is the absurdity of the sikh claims - I just cannot see how a blade can represent peace for you.

Other Comments by Peacebeuponme

23. Comment #43580 by BaronOchs on May 22, 2007 at 4:16 am

 avatar
They are getting preferential treatment in the UK - I cannot carry a knife, but they can. That is discrimination, plain and simple.


They can also ride motorcycles without helmets because of their turbans. Essentially here the laws of britain are saying wear a helmet or bow to the teachings of some oriental guru. ridiculous. Either no one or everyone should have to wear a helmet. anything else is unacceptable.

Other Comments by BaronOchs

24. Comment #43585 by Philip1978 on May 22, 2007 at 4:28 am

 avatarSuki, a person died because of this "blasphemy", I don't call that peaceful, I call it barbaric and wasteful.

Other Comments by Philip1978

25. Comment #43587 by Logicel on May 22, 2007 at 4:35 am

 avatarMy husband belongs to the Trousers Religion, and during the month of June he gives his trousers a rest and a nice wash per divine edict, walking around nude which brings quite a lot of heat of outraged protest in his pleasantly aerated and cool direction. However, he is a true believer and wears his proof of his precious religious beliefs with majestic, divinely inspired aplomb, not to mention panache.

Other Comments by Logicel

26. Comment #43591 by Philip1978 on May 22, 2007 at 4:46 am

 avatarLogicel, I see you are a happy woman, married to a man with "divinely inspired aplomb", do you wish it was more than once a month?! (I have heard of several ways of describing it but this one sure does pay him compliments!!)

Sorry, in a saucy mood today, behave Philip!

Other Comments by Philip1978

27. Comment #43596 by Logicel on May 22, 2007 at 5:00 am

 avatarPhilip, Adhering to the Trousers Religion takes great bravery, and I will not stand by as you make light of the seriousness of my husband's religion. He suffers enough, as during the entire month of June instead of prancing about in his birthday suit outside, he is forced to observe his sacred ritual cooped up inside. Have a little sympathy for the religious discrimination under which he labors, please!

Also, like so many infidels you misunderstand what his true beliefs are--it is the ENTIRE MONTH OF JUNE during which his trousers are given a rest, not once monthly. I can tell from this rabid misunderstanding on your part, that you probably would also conveniently misunderstand the other monthly rituals which occupy him during the other eleven months. And for that reason, I refuse to share those rituals with you.

Other Comments by Logicel

28. Comment #43598 by pewkatchoo on May 22, 2007 at 5:03 am

 avatarSo once a year then Logicel! Poor you!

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

29. Comment #43606 by Logicel on May 22, 2007 at 5:21 am

 avatarThe Trousers Religion is the way my atheist husband responds to religious folks bemoaning how they are discriminated against when practicing their religion.

It is noted that when describing one ritual of this hypothetical religion, some here right away divined that it was sex to which I was referring. Hmmmmm. The ritual is simply the airing and washing of his trousers during the month of June. But then again, what can one expect from godless heathens!

Other Comments by Logicel

30. Comment #43619 by pewkatchoo on May 22, 2007 at 6:02 am

 avatarYou were expecting intelligence???

Other Comments by pewkatchoo

31. Comment #43622 by Peacebeuponme on May 22, 2007 at 6:13 am

Comment #43580 by BaronOchs :

They can also ride motorcycles without helmets because of their turbans. Essentially here the laws of britain are saying wear a helmet or bow to the teachings of some oriental guru. ridiculous. Either no one or everyone should have to wear a helmet. anything else is unacceptable.


I'd love to see them wear a massive helmet that allowed them to wear a turban underneath. That would look brilliant. I don't know if you have seen Brass Eye, but in the "Drugs" episode Chris Morris wears something like that when trying to score fictitious drugs off a street-dealer. Little off the point I know...

Other Comments by Peacebeuponme

32. Comment #43629 by cybercoma on May 22, 2007 at 6:33 am

 avatarThe Supreme Court of Canada made a ruling allowing Sikh children to carry these daggers in school. No other child is allowed to carry a weapon and no one is allowed to carry a concealed weapon on the street, unless of course you're a Sikh. The argument was that it is ceremonial and not a weapon. I believe this article smashes that argument to pieces nicely. Canadians need to get the SCC to revoke their decision for public safety and the safety of our children.

Other Comments by cybercoma

33. Comment #43642 by Philip1978 on May 22, 2007 at 7:03 am

 avatarLogicel, my heresy knows no bounds, for when I air my trousers during June I have been known to wear other trousers and even boxer shorts!

Therefore my corrupted and sinful mind made light of your husband's ways and "divinely inspired aplomb"! The chances of me repenting for my sins may happen when I could air my trousers with the right woman! But alas, I could be branded as having a copycat religion to that of your husband! So forever in sin shall I wonder!

Other Comments by Philip1978

34. Comment #43644 by Veronique on May 22, 2007 at 7:14 am

 avatarSalutations to your husband Logicel, next month is the one. I hope the south of France is warm enough for him.

Great little repartee too Philip and pewkatchoo.

In most countries there is a bending of normal rules for the disabled. That there's another system that enables them as well is disturbing. Knives are dangerous implements to carry around regardless of 'cultural and religious' customs.

I can't understand what Canada thinks it's doing.
cybercoma, do you know offhand what percentage of the population is Sikh. They can be pretty hard line. A Sikh neighbour of mine disowned his daughter 20 odd years ago because she left home and went to the Gold Coast and married an Australian. He refuses to even speak her name. She is dead to him. Her mother sometimes gets reports of her well being from a female pipeline up and down the coast. She, of course, is distraught that she will never see her daughter or grandchildren.

Prior to all this, the daughter went to the local school, as did her brother, with my two sons. The family came to my house, the kids played together quite happily, we adults got on well together. The father and I used to take our bananas to the goods train some 20 miles ago and sit in the bar with a drink and chat with other banana growers. Very amicable. He changed though, after the girl left. He's getting older and surlier.

Sound familiar? It's only a peaceful religion if no one steps out of line. Then watch out.

Still not impressed by any one of these thousands of religious sects and their loopy rules and beliefs. Not one scrap.

Bed.
V

Other Comments by Veronique

35. Comment #43645 by BaronOchs on May 22, 2007 at 7:18 am

 avatarLogicel, a religion that believes in nice clean trousers, I think I might be going to their hell! or at least their purgatory . . .

Other Comments by BaronOchs

36. Comment #43650 by cybercoma on May 22, 2007 at 7:32 am

 avatarVeronique,

Out of about 30,000,000 Canadians approximately 278,000 declared themselves as Sikhs in the 2001 census.

BTW: More on the case can be found on CBC's website.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2006/03/02/kirpan-scoc060302.html

Other Comments by cybercoma

37. Comment #44051 by John Phillips on May 23, 2007 at 8:23 am

This peaceful religion carries the knife as a symbol of the great warriors they claim they are/were. Sikhism is a warrior religion and doesn't protest peacefully as we discovered last year when a sikh woman wrote a play about sex abuse and murder in a temple which was shown in a theatre in Birmingham, UK. The theatre was literally besieged by sikhs and and in the end the play was cancelled, partly because the police couldn't guarantee safety to the actors or the theatregoers.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/west_midlands/4107437.stm

Other Comments by John Phillips

38. Comment #63185 by Murakh Di Sangat on August 13, 2007 at 12:43 pm

When will people learn to seperate politics and culture from Religion?

Let's see:

Equal Rights for women when Europe was in the dark ages;

Abolition of caste, creed, economic, racial, religious and sexist discrimination;

Abolition of all superstition including idol worship, fortune telling, reliance on astrology, communicating with the dead etc (how original you are Dawkins).

Fighting oppression, fanaticism, tyranny, persecution against all humanity;

Practicing chivalry;

Not claiming monopoly on God, but believing that all humans irrelevant of faith or culture are children of the 1 God and equally able to gain his grace through truthful actions.

Earn an honest living (with no negative affect on others) and give 1/10th of our earnings to the poor.

Practice nishkaam seva (selfless service) to serve humanity i.e. Guru's langar (kitchen) which is open to all people (esp the poor) in all Gurdwaras.

These are just a few small points, but getting to the kirpan (sword) and dastaar (turban) points; I will quote Winston Churchill, you people never had a problem with the wearing of either when hundreds of thousands of Sikhs died fighting for British freedom in the great wars.

Before making a mockery of a great Warrior Saint tradition, I would humbly suggest that you actually learn something about it.

Sir Winston Churchill was very well conversant with the bravery of the Sikhs, who had fought for Britain in the World Wars. Churchill while speaking in the British Parliament said:

".....It is a matter of regret that due to the obsession of the present times people are distorting the superior religious and social values, but those who wish to preserve them with respect, we should appreciate them as well as help them. Sikhs do need our help for such a cause and we should give it happily. Those who know the Sikh history, know England's relationship with the Sikhs and are aware of the achievements of the Sikhs, they should persistently support the idea of relaxation to Sikhs to ride a motorbike with their turbans on, because it is their religious privilege."

Churchill, further added:

"...British people are highly indebted and obliged to Sikhs for a long time. I know that within this century we needed their help twice and they did help us very well. As a result of their timely help, we are today able to live with honour, dignity, and independence. In the war, they fought and died for us, wearing the turbans. At that time we were not adamant that they should wear safety helmets because we knew that they are not going to wear them anyways and we would be deprived of their help. At that time due to our miserable and poor situation, we did not force it on them to wear safety helmets, why should we force it now? Rather, we should now respect their traditions and by granting this legitimate concession, win their applaud."

Other Comments by Murakh Di Sangat
Reload Comments | Back to Top

Comment Entry: Please Login

Register a new account

Username:

Password: