In the Bachittar Natak, Guru Gobind Singh Ji, the tenth Sikh Guru, mentions his ancestral lineage tracing back to Lav and Kush, the sons of Rama. This historical reference has been misinterpreted by some to suggest that Sikhs are Hindus. Such arguments, however, fail under rational scrutiny and a deeper understanding of Sikhi’s distinct identity and teachings.
Firstly, it is essential to recognize that family background does not determine religious identity. Religion is not an inherent trait passed down through ancestry but is a matter of personal belief and practice. Guru Gobind Singh Ji himself declared that he was an “idol breaker,” explicitly rejecting many core elements of Hinduism, such as the caste system, idol worship, and the authority of the Vedas and Puranas.
For instance, in the Zaffarnama, Guru Gobind Singh wrote:
ਮਨਮ ਕੁਸ਼ਤਨਮ ਕੋਹੀਯਾਂ ਬੁਤ ਪਰਸਤ ॥
ਕਿ ਓ ਬੁਤ ਪਰਸਤੰਦੁ ਮਨ ਬੁਤ ਸ਼ਿਕਸਤ ॥95॥
“I have killed hill Rajas (kings) who are bent on mischief. They are stone idol worshippers, I break idols and I worship one Lord.”
Similarly, in the Akal Ustat, he said:
ਕਾਹੇ ਕਉ ਪੂਜਤ ਪਾਹਨ ਕਉ ਕਛੁ ਪਾਹਨ ਮੈ ਪਰਮੇਸੁਰ ਨਾਹੀ ॥
ਤਾਹੀ ਕੋ ਪੂਜ ਪ੍ਰਭੂ ਕਰਿ ਕੈ ਜਿਹ ਪੂਜਤ ਹੀ ਅਘ ਓਘ ਮਿਟਾਹੀ ॥
“Why do you worship stones? The Lord is not in any stones. Worship that Lord by whose adoration is destroyed all conflicts.”
These declarations emphasize Guru Gobind Singh’s departure from Hindu practices and beliefs, underscoring Sikhi’s distinct religious identity.
If we were to accept the argument that ancestry determines religion, then it would create numerous inconsistencies.
Examples from Christianity and Islam
A person becomes a Sikh not by birth but through initiation. When one takes Amrit and follows the Rehat prescribed by the Panj Pyare, they embrace a new way of life, shedding previous ties to caste and ancestry. This initiation transforms the individual’s spiritual and social identity, making their former family background irrelevant. Guru Gobind Singh Ji himself took Amrit, reinforcing that Sikh identity is based on spiritual rebirth rather than ancestral lineage.
The argument that Sikhs are a sect of Hindus presents several contradictions, particularly from the perspective of organizations like the RSS. If Sikhs are indeed a “better” or “more civilized” form of Hindus, as some claim, then why don’t these organizations propagate Sikh practices such as taking Amrit and following Khalsa Rehat? Why not honor Guru Gobind Singh Ji as a central figure in their religious narrative?
Furthermore, the notion that the Khalsa was established merely to protect Hinduism is flawed and historically inaccurate. The Khalsa was created as a sovereign community with its distinct religious identity and values. The atrocities of 1984, where the Darbar Sahib was attacked, and the subsequent violence against Sikhs, highlight the deep-seated animosity and differentiation between the two communities. Such hostility contradicts the idea of a unified religious identity.
Sikhs are a distinct community with their own unique religious beliefs, practices, and identity. The historical reference to Guru Gobind Singh Ji’s ancestry does not equate to Sikhism being a sect of Hinduism. Instead, Sikhism stands on its own, with a clear and separate path defined by its Gurus. Misinterpretations and attempts to conflate Sikh identity with Hinduism overlook the profound philosophical and practical differences between the two religions. Sikhism’s emphasis on equality, rejection of caste, and unique spiritual practices underscore its distinct and independent nature.
